Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
User Settings
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Harrisburg, PA 09/18

Regularly scheduled events

User information for .

Real Name .   
Search for:
Sort results:   Ascending Descending
Limit results:
Nickname Beamer
Email Concealed by request - Send Mail
ICQ None given.
Homepage None given.
Signed On Jan 9, 2003, 00:22
Total Comments 14527 (Ninja)
User ID 15739
User comment history
< Newer [ 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ] Older >

News Comments > etc., etc.
98. Re: etc., etc. Oct 24, 2014, 12:58 Beamer
Here's another thing you keep hearing from developers:
"Stop stifling criticism. I want to hear criticism."

A lengthy post on Reddit titled "Hey, stop claiming to be my shield"
Hi KiA,

I'm here to tell you about a problem I have, not just to rant or whine, but to get your opinion and see if it makes sense -- because it's something that matters a lot to me as someone who's spent half of my life working on games. So keep that in mind as I explain my request to y'all and to games in general, and I will try to listen if you disagree or raise concerns I'm not thinking about.

I'm a game developer. I've been making games professionally for 15 years and as a teenage hobbyist before that, working on all sorts of games on various platforms and for different audiences. Many of you would recognize some of my games, and all of you would recognize some of the companies I've worked for. This is a throwaway account, not my usual reddit username, because there are trolls around targeting people on various sides of these issues and I'm not into taking that kind of risk.

I don't support gamergate as a whole, although I do support SOME of the things that GG has raised -- even if some people involved haven't raised those issues sincerely. Journalistic ethics, fine; some of the specific charges look like really trumped-up "gotchas" disguising other axes being ground, others only have extremely scant evidence, other things still verge on pure apophenia -- but some of the patterns pointed to should be aired and discussed. Harassment and threats in the air around GG -- obviously any decent person is against that. Neither of those things are why I am posting here.

Here's what I have to say. I oppose the idea that one set of people -- gamergaters, feminists, gamers in general, however you want to slice the crowd -- should get to dictate what's acceptable to talk about in reviews, feedback, criticism, writing, videos about games. And I see that demand -- to get to draw lines around what's acceptable or not in say, a game review -- WAY more from gamergate than from anyone else, ever in my career.

What am I talking about here? Demands that reviews not involve a political critique, or that politics, feminism, whatever only be a certain percentage of a review. Demands that game reviews should be purely, or closer to purely "objective" without the subjective opinions and experiences of a reviewer. Demands that feminsits should shut up, or shouldn't be listened to, for complaining about what female characters in games look like, can do, or are treated.

You know what? I might not agree with those critiques, I might think they're full of shit or don't represent the players I'm trying to reach. That doesn't mean I don't want to hear them, or that I'm afraid of how amplified or angry they are. A whole lot of game development is about listening -- to players, to critics, to people that hate your game, to people that love it, to your team and yourself. Listening is not the same thing as blindly obeying like a puppet -- and acting as if I or other game developers can't handle it or make our own decisions when someone says "hey this is sexist" is way more insulting and destructive than any amount of fake-social-justice white-knighting if it gets to the point of silencing feedback. You are not our shield.

I've seen gamergate supports complaining about things like how the Stanley Parable got criticized about one joke in the game being racist, and decided to change it. What I hear, as a dev, as the unwitting message of those complaints is "no, Davey Wreden CAN'T be the one to decide what he wants to change about his own game. He must be a brainwashed coward." Fuck that. Ironically, you know who criticized that one joke and got it changed? Oliver Campbell, the pro-GG journalist.

I've seen complaints about how Wildstar changed the breast size of their characters due to complaints from a relatively small group of players. What I hear is "game devs HAVE to obey the majority will of the players who are bothering to speak up in their forums, not think about how it affects a smaller group of players, even if they're going to add in more options to make everyone happy later." Fuck that.

I've seen the story about the Divinity: Original Sin artist over and over again, about how upset he was that his boss told him to cover up a character's belly. You know what I see in that story? A boss who maybe made a wrong call -- but if it WAS wrong, it's that developer's fault, not the people who complained, and it was still that person's call to make. And an artist who disagreed enough with his boss's call that he felt it necessary to complain about the internal decisions of his team in public until everyone's yelling censorship. You know what actual censorship would be? If the government, or some industry body, told the D:OS team what to do. What else would be censorship? If gamergate somehow managed to make the complaints about a bare belly disappear, quiet down, or go completely unheard.

And it's worth saying: when random trolls around gamergate (even if they're not "in" gamergate, and it's hard to say if any are or not) are acquiring targets to strike based on GG complaints about feminists, fear of threats and doxxing can definitely play a role in silencing & censorship too. Even if it's "not technically your fault" as an individual -- there's a net effect.

I see Daniel Vavra all over the place complaining about censorship, when his main gripe started with one person asking some historian on tumblr if there were any black people in Bohemia, and the answer was basically no. If you ask me, this makes Daniel Vavra seem like he's trying to milk a situation, which is like, eh, devs do whatever we can for promo -- but it makes it very ironic when people who support Vavra complain about others who "play the victim." Nobody censored Vavra, he did whatever he wants, he knows no horde of anti-racists is coming to keep his game sales down -- and yet he went on talking about how websites aren't covering his game. You know how not to get sites to cover your game? Moan about how you're being oppressed because nobody's paying attention to your game (even though, as shown in some recent threads here on KiA, it actually HAS gotten plenty of coverage from even the sites that gamergate's fighting with).

So yeah -- I have no respect for this stuff. Speaking for myself -- please do not ever get in the way of any criticism, no matter how stupid, that a developer of a game may want to hear. Do not be our shield or our earmuffs: fuck that. Some developers may disagree with me. They may say "no, I don't want to hear that stuff, it enrages me and makes it harder for me to make my games!" You know what? I have a big old side-eye for those devs. Plug your ears, if you can't handle it, if hearing a criticism is going to blow your shaky creative vision out of the water. Stay offline. We get death threats for adjusting sniper rifle firing time; the threat is not worth hearing, but "I hate this nerf" is, and how much more so is "the way women look in your game makes me uncomfortable" if someone feels that?

Three of my games have been criticized for being racist or for being sexist. Some of those criticisms were utterly stupid and I ignored them. I was annoyed for a little bit, then I shrugged it off. Others were actually valid criticisms, and led me to make some changes, at MY discretion. If you go around trying to stamp out "politics" or "feminism" or "social justice critiques" in general, you take away my creative right to decide which is which. Can you see why that might piss me off? I don't care if the criticism of my game makes you feel all bad and like you might be a terrible person for enjoying my game -- learn how to hold two different things at the same time, how to hear a critique and consider whether it's any good, and still enjoy everything you like about a game. It's still the game that I'm pouring my blood, sweat and tears into making, and I should get to hear whatever criticisms come at me about it, no matter how stupid I end up thinking they are, no matter if they form 5% or 20% or 70% of a review. I have never had a bad review that was clearly just one reviewer's opinion keep a game of mine down; do you really think a Kotaku review talking about how a game is sexist is going to affect potential players who don't care that much about sexism?

I am also a gamer, I've been playing video games for almost forty years, and as a gamer I even want to hear critiques -- yes, even messed-up ones that I don't disagree with -- about gaming culture. If you can't handle this kind of thing, fine -- rail against it, plug your ears, start your own site and express your opinions -- but I disagree with trying to get it pulled, or getting people fired, or trying to make those opinions disappear. I have only one "vote" in this matter as a gamer -- this is a different kind of issue than the rest of this post, which is about "don't fuck with what kind of input I get to hear as part of my creative process." But some of the same logic applies.

All of the above also goes for the "objectivists" who think there should be NO subjective opinions in game reviews. Come on.

Postscript: Metacritic scores are a huge problem, they strip the nuance from reviews and mush everything together, and I don't know anyone who agrees with the practice of basing publisher payments on Metacritic scores. That's utter BS that harms the industry. In fact, I think review scores in general are harmful, and I know a lot of you agree. Start another movement that's focused solely on that issue, without all this other garbage tagging along for the ride, and I will support it, as will many others.

And here's an initial response:
It wouldn't stop them. That is a good thing. Last I checked, no one is forcing you to read their work. However, given that clearly someone wants to read their work, or they wouldn't be getting paid, there is a market for people like me who care about the implications of a game, not just the game itself, and reviews which talk about that have a place. If you want games to be treated like art, it's time to start accepting they be reviewed like art, not like toys.

You want game reviewers to have different views and be biased. You WANT that. Find a reviewer whose tastes match yours, and listen to them above others. Do you just absolutely love this one niche genre of game, and want to see more games like it? Great, find a reviewer who loves those games, and take a look at everything they rated highly! Hate one genre of games, but know one reviewer loves them? Take their reviews with as much salt as you feel appropriate! Subjective reviews of any piece of media are the best thing possible for reviews. You don't hire a hip hop lover to review a metal album, you don't hire a romcom fan to review a horror movie, and yet you're asking for a platformer lover to review an action RPG and somehow take himself out of the equation (hint: that isn't possible).

And you're right, paying for good reviews is bad practice! But guess what, not only is that not the fault of the journalists, but rather the game devs- meaning you're shooting the messenger here- yelling at the journalists won't stop that.

It's a fucking game review. How fucking hard is it to just review the game based on it's own merits?

"It's a fucking movie review. How fucking hard is it to just review the movie based on it's own merits?"


It is, in fact, really fucking hard to review something based on its own merits, because you yourself have to play it. I fucking love music games, and I will probably rate any music games miles better than they merit. Beat Hazard? (huge epilepsy warning for that game/video btw) Frankly probably a mediocre to good game. But I fucking loved it, simply because it's in the genre I love, and I can't review it based on it's own merits. That isn't possible.

Objective reviews cannot exist, simply because a reviewer has to exist. If a reviewer hates a genre, even if they try to be objective about it, their view on the game will still be soured simply based off the fact they hate that type of game! I fucking hate modern military shooters, so you probably shouldn't listen to my opinion on whether or not Call of Duty 174 is any good, because even if it is, I'm going to say it's shit.

If you want games to be treated as more than toys, you have to accept what comes along with it. Take a look at any movie review- let's just grab one at total random off the front page of Metacritic. It literally opens up the first three paragraphs discussing some of the political culture surrounding the movie, and the implications of that, both the implication of society on the movie, and the movie on society. This is a good thing, and is important for any good review.

If you want games to be treated like toys, and want them to get "reviews" that look like a review for fucking Bop-It with a few words switched, be my guest. Sorry for wanting games to grow up and be treated like the medium they properly are. Sorry for wanting actually good reviews, and actually good reviewers.

Reviews, even bad ones, give devs feedback. Valid feedback. Things to think about that maybe they didn't realize. Maybe they shrug it off, maybe not.

And the whole Gamergate wanting something judged "on its merits" rather than as something larger contrasts so heavily with people claiming games are art, and art is never judged "on its merits."
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
96. Re: etc., etc. Oct 24, 2014, 12:38 Beamer
Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 12:30:
Beamer wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 12:23:
But there's an enormous amount of AAA games that are almost definitely getting unfairly positive coverage. I'd say far less today than, say, the days of Doom 3 getting a 19 page review with a 97% despite being a heaping pile of shit, but yes, AAA games still get an advantage because the publishers throw enormous amounts of free crap at people. And this is questionable.
Yet, instead, female indie devs getting a few sentences of coverage has been all Gamergate has focused on when it comes to "ethics."

Gamers have been talking about the relationship between major companies and gaming journalists for a while now. It's old news, but it has been talked about.

The difference is that major companies generally don't try to demonize gamers or go on the attack against them for their criticisms or their disagreements.

Gamers mocked and attacked EA viciously over all kinds of things, from Mass Effect 3's ending to the whole SimCity debacle to worse. They've attacked score rigging allegations, misleading reviews, and more. And no one cares. They saved Phil Fish for behaving poorly.

Oh, but mock or criticize a female indie dev and it's a whole other situation.

If a heavyset female dev had people joke about her the way people joke about Gabe Newell, can you imagine the reaction?

If you don't understand the difference between hating the ME3 ending and what's happening to all the female "Literally Who's" then I'm sorry. I'm done with you.
You're saying so many disconnected things and just not seeing how some are massively damaging for tiny indescretions and some were basically ignored.

I mean, you mention SimCity and ME3, two games that didn't have review issues, in a discussion about journalist ethics.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
95. Re: etc., etc. Oct 24, 2014, 12:35 Beamer
Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 11:57:

It's little surprise that developers would try to duck this shitstorm at this point. Early into it you had developers and journalists, particularly in the indie community, entirely willing to come out swinging against the evil misogynist woman-hating nerds who everyone despises (remember the 'gamers are dead/the past/shitty/etc' schtick that started all this?) Now that it turns out that they don't control the dialogue or the repercussions, those same people are about as reluctant to speak up as, oh... people who are critical of them used to be, and largely still are.

Plenty of "big" developers are very outspoken on this. Tim Schafer, Clint Hocking, Tom Hall, Cliff Bleszkinski, Rhinnna Pratchett, Neil Druckmann, Jonathan Blow, Richard Garriott, etc. These are names everyone knows.
Who that matters has come out in support of it?

Yeah, I think you'll typically find 'supporting women from harassment' usually cashed out to 'made it sound as if GG was some horrible, mean movement that everyone should disown'. There are various women who support GG, and of course men. Are GG people going 'These women are speaking! How dare they! This is a MAN'S movement'?

Ah, the women supporting GG. Yes, of course some do. Interesting how they are literally used as shields despite that whole "not my shield" thing. "How can we be against women when we have some standing right over there!?"

Yeah, this isn't about vaginas having opinions, and you should probably stop referring to women as 'vaginas'. It's about a particular subset of people, even a particular subset of feminists - a mix of both men and women - whose 'opinions' and antics have been pretty nasty and derogatory and yes, even unethical. You see plenty of criticism of men by GG people, because there's no lack of anti-GG men, and male journalists/developers in general, worth criticizing.


Yes, they have. Especially if 'harassment' is broadened to include contacting advertisers, being critical and dismissive, and more.

Yes, and if "harassment" is broadened to include saying hello to someone in the morning, I've been harassed by all my coworkers.

Yup, another person who defends and excuses demonization and attacking. Why? Because I disagree with you and your views on misogyny. You dislike my opinion, you think my opinion is 'damaging', and that justifies belittling, attacks, demonization, and silencing.

You're disagreeing with fact! That's the problem! Misogyny isn't like whether mushrooms taste good. It isn't subjective. It's a factual thing and you're disagreeing with what it is objectively.
How can I not say that's wrong and how can I say it's a rational thing to say that the sky is green and Nickelback is a great band?

And it never occurs to you that someone can listen to women, can read what feminists are saying... and still disagree on principle. It simply doesn't register to you that a woman who disagrees with your views isn't some victim who needs to be re-educated by you, the would-be merciful provider of wisdom.

Women: this is damaging to us
You: in my opinion, it isn't
Women: how can you say that?
You: it's my opinion, stop demonizing me and just accept this is my nature and it's fine!

I'm done with you. I'm sorry. You fundamentally do not understand what misogyny is. You keep kicking and screaming and claiming to be demonized. Sorry. You're ignorant. I know you'll find the word offensive, but you should find it educational. Ignorant literally means lacking awareness and understanding on a particular topic, and you lack awareness about what misogyny is. Dangerously, you feel comfortable telling people what it is and why they're wrong.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
92. Re: etc., etc. Oct 24, 2014, 12:23 Beamer
NKD wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 11:51:
Beamer wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 10:37:
Because absolutely no one really cares about that aspect,

I do. And a lot of other people do from what I've seen. You forget that this whole thing started over worries about conflict of interest in game reviews. It's long since been derailed, but that's the subject a lot of us were hoping we'd get back to. The bottom line is that if the conflict of interest was a non-sexual relation, like a blood relative or a business partner, the conversation would never have been derailed and we could have had a discussion about transparency when it comes to potential conflicts of interest.

It's odd, because I remember a time when Blue's News commenters were eager to point out funny business when it came to reviews and game coverage. I remember a time when we lamented the crapping-up of our hobby by "casuals" and "console gamers".

Now no one can even be fucked to post anything unless it's about the latest social media hipster bullshit.

But no one cares for the amount this is going on.
You care, but you aren't a "gamergater." You're a gamer.

And we all care, honestly. But where people care makes no fucking sense right now. Again, Ars published, back when Black Ops came out, an article about all the free trips and swag reviewers got from Activision. An entire vacation!
No one mentions this.

But an indie game developer gets two sentences in an article about indie games as a whole? Better make sure those two people were never seen in the same room! Wait, they were? Because the games industry is small and everyone knows everyone and it's impossible to go to any kind of games conference and not meet at least a half dozen indie developers?

And, of course, all the indie developers that people keep singling out are female.

It's a very small industry. And there's, at best, a symbiotic relationship between the press and the developers. One needs the other exclusively to exist, and the other thrives more thanks to the other. We can't expect that our reporters don't have friendships with the developers. That's not reasonable. These people spend enormous amounts of time with each other.
What we can expect is that their reviews won't be biased. And we've yet to see a single example of an indie developer getting an unfairly positive review.
Not one.
Not a single fucking one.

But there's an enormous amount of AAA games that are almost definitely getting unfairly positive coverage. I'd say far less today than, say, the days of Doom 3 getting a 19 page review with a 97% despite being a heaping pile of shit, but yes, AAA games still get an advantage because the publishers throw enormous amounts of free crap at people. And this is questionable.
Yet, instead, female indie devs getting a few sentences of coverage has been all Gamergate has focused on when it comes to "ethics."
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
87. Re: etc., etc. Oct 24, 2014, 11:28 Beamer
Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 10:57:
Beamer wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 10:43:
See, but this is funny. Sarkesian may have made dissent demonized, but there was dissent.

In what world is dissent disappearing due to GG? You yourself repeatedly talk about how GG is portrayed in the media.

Well, I mean:
1) The only female developers The Escapist could find to talk to would do it solely anonymously
2) Several female reporters have been harassed to the point that they no longer cover games
3) When Felicia Day writes an article about how so many women won't discuss GG out of fear of retaliation, she's immediately retaliated against

If you don't think that developers, particularly female ones but also the male ones that aren't "big" enough to carry weight, aren't being silent out of fear you're incredibly wrong. Again, everyone seems to think the Clickhole article supports them, but it's pretty clearly about how, if anyone openly disagrees with Gamergate, they become outright fucked.

Because GG developed this 'contact advertisers and developers over content you disagree with' model, which was never, ever boosted by the anti-GG crew? Come on. What's different is that this is a tactic - once praised and seen as entirely legitimate - now being used by people who are used to being on the receiving end of such things.

I've certainly never contacted an advertiser, nor organized or supported a significant spam campaign because someone says things I don't like.
And yes, it's because people said things. Not a single one of these campaigns was around "ethics." Outside of the moron Sam Biddle, it was because someone said something supporting women from harassment. BAM! Goodbye ad dollars. ETHICS!

Once again - because harassment, namecalling, and doxing are new? It's deplorable, it always has been, and it's also been common. I've gotten death threats. I've been called names, including sexualized ones, male and female alike.

And it's not as if 'having a penis' makes you immune from GG criticism. See Gawker for only the latest example.

Gawker was more because of bullying comments than GG. And that's one example. Again, go to the idiotic KotakuInAction and look at all the devs the endlessly discuss. Each one has a vagina. And the celebrities they worship hate vaginas. And their mods all run anti-vagina subreddits.
Anyone claiming this isn't about vaginas having opinions is delusional.
And sorry, no male has received nearly the level and type of harassment the females in this are getting.

Catcalling is disrespectful, but it's also hardly defended. Half-naked heroines? That's not misogyny. And that's another problem: 'misogyny' has been defined to mean, in essence, 'disagreeing with a given group of feminists'. If you do not think it's a terrible thing that some comics feature sexy female characters, well then, you're a misogynist, you're a bad person, and you need to 'be educated'. The very possibility that people disagree on this is ruled out from the start, and the people who do disagree were demonized and attacked, including in media.

Yup, another guy that doesn't understand misogyny. Sorry, you simply do not get it. This is why you're demonized and attacked - you get so insanely defensive over having an opinion that's misinformed, ignorant and damaging. Rather than sit back and try to understand why this happens, you just get louder, angrier, more misinformed and more aggressive.

I've learned most men don't understand misogyny because they don't bother listening to women. They just go with what seems right and wrong to them. But misogyny doesn't impact them, so it shouldn't be their feelings that really matter here.
Sorry, endless waves of half-naked heroines is misogyny. Period. There's really no room for debate here.

I'm tired of people trying to find the silver bullet for their views of women and sex that allows them to bypass the whole "others can reasonably dissent, and not everyone has to conform to your view" step.

It's like people that try to reasonably dissent with evolution or climate change. Sometimes opinions are just wrong. There's no room for reasonable dissent when the opinion trying to dissent is just unreasonable.
Misogyny exists. You do not understand what it is. I am sorry about that. I understand it, too. It's only been in the past five years or so that I've begun to understand what it is and how stupid shit I said that I felt was totally innocuous and absolutely normal was actually neither of those things.

I suppose, further, you'd criticize feminists who protested / tried to pull advertising or funding or hurt the financial aspect of comics or video games or media that featured or defended the presence of sexualized female characters, saying they were "trying to shut down conversation"?

I never heard of anyone asking advertisers to pull funding. They ask companies to change. Companies often do. And advertisers often pull funding because they agree with the people complaining to the companies.
At the very least, there were never organized anti-ad campaigns on this level. We're talking Million Moms kind of stuff with Gamergate.

And yes, companies pull funding from other companies that they think are misogynist all the time. But it's because they think they're misogynist. Do you think Adobe thinks that about Gawker, or do you think Adobe just got scared into action?
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
86. Re: etc., etc. Oct 24, 2014, 11:17 Beamer
Dagnamit wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 10:46:
Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 10:06:
There's no discussion about it because there's no discussion to have. Everyone wants ethical journalists, there's no debate there.

That's not true. Everyone says they want ethical journalists. It's not what everyone actually wants.

And you can see as much in the coverage of #GG.

I denounce death threats. Whenever I see this come up among GGers, I never see a guy who says 'someone should send her a death threat' or 'X got a death threat, that's great, maybe it'll shut him up'. Find me the prominent outspoken GG supporter defending death threats, or encouraging them, as opposed to denouncing them.

Yet how many times is GG reported on as 'the group of people who send death threats to women because they hate women' by the media?

How ethical is that?

It's ethical because they're reporting the news and those people have the loudest voices. It's not unethical to report what people say. It's not the media's job to ignore the loudest most offensive voices. That's your job, sir edit:(or, ma'am.). Take some responsibility about what news outlets to trust. If the loudest voices were GG's denouncing the acts of the assholes then that might get some play as well. If you think the media is unfair, let them know with words and actions.

Loosely related: It isn't censorship to ignore you.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Evening Metaverse
7. Re: Evening Metaverse Oct 24, 2014, 11:16 Beamer
jdreyer wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 03:02:
NKD wrote on Oct 23, 2014, 22:51:
Map seems inaccurate. Patriots area is bigger than downtown Boston? Bullshit.

Meh, in my experience growing up, half of CT is Pats fans, the other half is Giants fans. Must have tipped a bit more toward the Pats of late. No one liked the Jets though. Then, or now.

Yup. It always seemed Hartford was the tipping point.
However, I dated a girl from Greenwich that was a Yankees fan and a Patriots fan. I think she just liked being hated (I mean, at least she wasn't a Cowboys fan.)
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
82. Re: etc., etc. Oct 24, 2014, 10:43 Beamer
Yeahyeah Yeah wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 10:00:
I would point out that, as you said, things are getting better. And they are getting better because of people like Sarkeesian.

No, we're really not.

Thanks to people like Sarkeesian, we're now at the point where any substantial from dissent on these topics is met automatically with one or another variety of demonization.

Do you think it's not important that the next GTA feature a female "protagonist?" Do you not think it's particularly important that 'female representation' is boosted in a genre, in an industry, or even a particularly popular game where there's a skew? Enjoy being belittled, mocked, or attacked if you express this view, being labeled a misogynist, and ultimately having it implied or being out and out accused of supporting death threats against Sarkeesian, and if you denounce such, well that's just your cover story.

Are you a female gamer who dislikes Sarkeesian or, better yet, disowns the beast that is now labeled 'feminism'? Enjoy people questioning your gender, psychoanalyzing you, belittling you, and generally treating you as a threat. Same if you're 'the wrong kind of feminist'.

Is your reply that you'd rather not deal with these issues, that you'd rather focus on games people like, and if someone wants to make a different kind of game they're welcome to it but you don't feel the need to push developers to change their games? Well, now you are 'part of the problem' and exactly the sort of person who ruins games for everyone.

The fact is, things have gotten better - and largely in spite of Sarkeesian. The best things to happen to the game industry in terms of diversity has been the technological advances: the onset of iOS/Android gaming, the rise of digital distribution, the rise of indie gaming, and more. All things which predate Sarkeesian, and radically opened the market up to more people, with more ideas. People like Sarkeesian have taken all this, and added a nice big splash of demonization and demagoguery, to the point where dissent is equated with hating women, and being someone who needs to be bullied, put down, and shamed into silence, because you stand in the way of some glorious gaming future with its glorious monotone expression of the world.

People like Sarkeesian have been a step backwards.

See, but this is funny. Sarkesian may have made dissent demonized, but there was dissent.

Thanks to gg, dissent is disappearing. If you disagree with gg you will have all of your advertisers spammed. If you have a vagina and disagree with gg you will be called a whore, get hacked, have your home address published, and get death threats.

People felt that anyone disagreeing with Anita that these things were misogynistic were guilty of misogyny, and sorry, there's truth there. Way too many guys don't understand the term and do not know it when they see it. They think it is just hating women. You see defences of things like catcalling or half naked heroines as "we do it because it's our nature to appreciate the female form, how can it be misogyny if I love women?" Nope, still misogyny. More men need to stop getting angry and defensive and talking and just start reading and listening to understand how stuff they think is normal and reasonable impacts those around them.

Gamergate shuts down conversation in a very different way.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
81. Re: etc., etc. Oct 24, 2014, 10:37 Beamer
NKD wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 07:23:
Julio wrote on Oct 24, 2014, 06:51:
#GG is still relevant as long as there is rampant corruption in game journalism.

How many of the articles linked to under the umbrella of GamerGate here are about game journalism, or even about games? I'm all for talking about corruption in game journalism.

But we don't seem to be getting articles about it, or discussions about it.

Because absolutely no one really cares about that aspect, and most people that tried had huge fundamental misunderstandings about journalism, ethics, and then wrapped both of those misunderstandings up with giant conspiracy theories and a weird focus on small publications and indie devs rather than larger publications and AAA publishers.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
47. Re: etc., etc. Oct 23, 2014, 23:24 Beamer
Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 23, 2014, 23:05:
Squirmer wrote on Oct 23, 2014, 23:02:
Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 23, 2014, 22:58:
The mainstream media will NEVER talk about Gamergate truthfully because they need to push the false narrative about misogyny gone wild in America as a tool to guilt people into voting for Hillary in 2016. Think it sounds paranoid? Sure. Write it down, save this post, and come back in two years and try to tell me I was wrong.

I'm usually ahead of the curve on this site by at least a year. A couple years ago I was mocked for saying literally the same stuff everyone is openly discussing now. I'm not surprised at all by your reaction and expect more dismissive and ignorant responses. That's fine. Just come back later and try to tell me I was wrong.

It's true. You have been well ahead of the curve of hatred and being against anyone different than you.

Congratulations, now a large number of gamers are acting and thinking just like you, and getting the same kind of loathing you used to receive around here when you would discuss how poor people deserve to be poor and lacking healthcare.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
44. Re: etc., etc. Oct 23, 2014, 23:19 Beamer
Extra Credits addresses the moderate GamerGate supporters
And the PR battle to defend the "Gamer" label has gone HORRIBLY. Gamers are getting more negative press right now than I've seen in years, and “GamerGat”e is the name everyone has attached to the problem (fairly or not).

Yup. "Gamers" have never, ever looked worse than they do right now.

And here's what the big Gamergate reddit forum moderators also moderate. Similarly to the celebrities that have supported Gamergate with long histories of hating women but not caring about video games, these guys all moderate anti-woman forums but don't moderate any game forums.
Yup. Ethics. It sure looks to anyone not really buying it that this is totally about ethics.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
8. Re: etc., etc. Oct 23, 2014, 20:36 Beamer
jdreyer wrote on Oct 23, 2014, 20:15:
So seeing another gamer on the street used to be an auto-smile opportunity, or an entry into a conversation starting with, “Hey, dude! I love that game too!” Me and that stranger automatically had something in common: A love for something unconventional. Outsiders in arms. We had an auto-stepping stone to hurtle over human-introduction-awkwardness, into talking about something we loved together. Instant connection!

And none of that has changed. Those people are still the same people they were two months ago. Although, is she really known for talking to strange men in gaming t-shirts on the street? I hadn't heard that. This story kind of seems contrived to make a point.

Regardless, the internet emboldens people to say shit they'd never say in real life. In person it's quite the opposite, men are friendly to pretty women that walk up to them on the street and express an interest in their hobby. I'd think that Felicia, 34 years old, would have realized this? Maybe it really happened this way. Maybe she's fearful of men she wouldn't have been a couple of months ago. It just seems unlikely for a woman that has been so involved in gaming for so long with so many fantastic experiences to suddenly do a 180.

All that being said, I guess she probably feels vindicated since she was doxxed within minutes. Whoever did that is an asshole.

I would say that was never really true. Unconventional?
I used to live next to Chad Ochocinco. Do you know what Chad Ochocinco did in his free time? He played Xbox. Enormous amounts of Xbox. He'd regularly have people from the neighborhood over for FIFA or Halo. And someone I work with now has a brother in the NFL and they all have Xbox and all play endless amounts against each other during the offseason.

These aren't nerds. These aren't outsiders. These are some of the richest, jockiest, broiest people on the planet. And maybe they're playing Halo or Call of Duty and not FTL or Civ5, but it's still games.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
5. Re: etc., etc. Oct 23, 2014, 19:50 Beamer
This is actually a very nice explanation of how many people see it.

It's looking at gamergate as an example of narrative. The inflammatory part, which he says mostly in passing, is that gamergate is the reaction of a majority to the introduction of the minority voice to culture as a whole, and that it isn't limited to video games. That gamergate believes:
1) There is no representation problem
2) Any problems are due to marketing economics
3) Status quo is normal and any change is artificial and therefore forced

All of those arguments have been made here repeatedly. And, as he points out, this is why people asking for change are seen as outsiders meddling. This is why war/terror tactics are seen as acceptable, because it's pushing out invaders. And yes, almost all are using war tactics, but only few are using terror tactics, but all are benefiting from those few using terror tactics because it silences so many (see: Clickhole's article yesterday mocking how people need to either agree or face the consequences.)

He adds why so many people use code names instead of real names, as well. All the "Literally Whos" who, incidentally, are all female and none of whom are journalists.
And he mocks how #notmyshield is literally using people as shields.

It's long, and slow to start, but really well thought out.

Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
4. Re: etc., etc. Oct 23, 2014, 19:17 Beamer
Felicia Day: posts something very personal about her fear and is doxxed within minutes.
Chris Kluwe: posts something very angry (and taking my view of the "Gamers are Dead," meaning he saw it as "gamers aren't all bitter nerds" and is weirded out at how many people got angry at that and then acted like bitter nerds) and has had nothing to fear at all.

It's definitely nice to be a guy.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Morning Interviews
33. Re: Morning Interviews Oct 23, 2014, 18:19 Beamer
bigspender wrote on Oct 23, 2014, 18:13:
Julio wrote on Oct 23, 2014, 12:14:
Who hasn't been harassed on the internet? I mean it`s happened to lots of us on this site. It's not difficult to poke someone online to make it happen. These people who are making a career of it are going to have to up the ante. Fake attacks will be next once the cash flow dries up from being a professional victim.

Also given men are more likely to be harassed than women (, why is the story one sided again?

It all comes back to no ethics in journalism.

Except if you actually look at the statistics, men are only slightly more likely to be harassed in general, but women are more likely to be stalked and sexually harassed, which a quite a bit more severe than name calling.

Good thing you aren't a journalist.

I'm getting really tired of hearing "it happens to men too" bullshit - that doesn't make it OK.

You mean this line?
Young women, those 18-24, experience certain severe types of harassment at disproportionately high levels: 26% of these young women have been stalked online, and 25% were the target of online sexual harassment. In addition, they do not escape the heightened rates of physical threats and sustained harassment common to their male peers and young people in general.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > Game Reviews
1. Re: Game Reviews Oct 23, 2014, 12:35 Beamer
IGN gave Beyond Earth a 7.9. It's a lot of fun reading the comments and seeing people convinced that IGN is corrupt because it gave Beyond Earth and Alien Isolation lower scores than other reviewers.

"The only way reviews are unbiased is if they all conform exactly and agree entirely!"
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
38. Re: etc., etc. Oct 22, 2014, 18:00 Beamer
jdreyer wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 13:26:
Beamer wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 11:18:
Lastly, can we stop pretending Kotaku discussing the perks in the next CoD is the same thing as CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, or the NYT having journalists embedded in Afghanistan or covering the riots in Ferguson? Stop equating this to actual journalists. Look instead at things like Fangoria or Teen Beat or Spin or Rolling Stone (well, the music coverage of Rolling Stone.) That's the proper analogy for the kinds of journalism we should expect. This isn't world news, this is telling you when video games will come out. You guys keep comparing McDonald's to The French Laundry. They're both "food," but things begin and end there.

Are you saying that there's a difference between Kotaku and CNN, MSNBC, & Fox? Because I am not really sure there is much of one in content and presentation, just in scope and revenue and reach. Both are gossipy and vapid. Both hype a product: games and news. Hell, if anything Kotaku is less sensational than those networks. And people deride Politico as "Tiger Beat on the Potomac" for example equating it to those other publications you mentioned. I'll agree that the NYT or WaPo are a cut or two above the cable TV networks, but what's on TV is uniformly as shallow as any gaming site out there. For in-depth coverage and analysis of the nation's or world's problems, I suggest some of the sites I listed. For TV I suggest BBC or Al Jazeera, which are still shallow because TV, but aren't nearly as vapid (I'm sure you know this already).

Fun fact: I've actually been to Al Jazeera's headquarters/studio in Doha.
And I agree, the US stations are horrible for actual news rather than muckraking and gossiping.

My point being, these guys are simply editorials and news coming from PR companies/departments. They're not Woodward and Bernstein and never will be. Comparing what video game journalists do to what Pulitzer prize winning newspaper journalists do seems unreasonable on many levels.

They exist to tell you when games come out and how they feel about those games. That's it. There's no room for them to do more.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc.
17. Re: etc. Oct 22, 2014, 17:48 Beamer
Mashiki Amiketo wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 17:24:
Beamer wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 11:14:
Many are claiming Sam Biddle's comments were sarcastic and taken out of context. Well, if true, that's why you don't make unclear, context-free comments with only 144 characters. It's the same weak excuse that jackass made after threatening Steam.
Out of curiosity, how can a pro-bullying comment be taken out of context? That's literally what he said, "bring back bullying" "nerds need to be attacked." And it's not the first time either he's said something like that.

I'm not defending him, I have no idea.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc., etc.
33. Re: etc., etc. Oct 22, 2014, 12:09 Beamer
Flatline wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 11:34:
Beamer wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 11:18:
These issues, of discussing employees with other potential employers, do happen everywhere. Again, I don't find this some smoking gun that the chat room was evil and unethical.

Again, go into those journalist bars and you'll see editors sitting around and, yes, they'll be discussing problems with employees. Some may be stupid and use names.

But said journalists are not stupid enough to write the shit down. And I'm sure if you pulled out a tape recorder they'd clam the fuck up. Yeah sure, there's collusion all the time, and it's a pissoff, but without proof what can you do right?

These asshats documented the proof themselves. They deserve no pity for being so... I dunno if it's stupid or egotistical or short-sighted as to document basically confessions of wrongdoing.

When someone brags on facebook that they robbed a house and the police nail them for it we don't say "but there's burglaries all the time so what's the big deal?"

We laugh at them for being idiots and ignoring common sense.

Journalists are absolutely stupid.
But, c'mon, these aren't journalists, these are people telling you how much the Season Pass for Borderlands 3 will cost.
Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
News Comments > etc.
5. Re: Adobe Oct 22, 2014, 12:02 Beamer
Elf Shot The Food wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 11:25:
Beamer wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 11:14:
Elf Shot The Food wrote on Oct 22, 2014, 11:07:
What's funny about that Adobe story is that someone who writes for the Ars Technica "liked" the pro-bullying tweets made by that Gawker idiot. And when someone in the comments section brought that up, no one responded.

Many are claiming Sam Biddle's comments were sarcastic and taken out of context. Well, if true, that's why you don't make unclear, context-free comments with only 144 characters. It's the same weak excuse that jackass made after threatening Steam.

Strange how that logic only applies to them and not to those they're attacking.

Have you not noticed that, if you try to apply what one person says to the whole, everything everyone says is hypocritical?

Music for the discerning:
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
14527 Comments. 727 pages. Viewing page 36.
< Newer [ 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 ] Older >


Blue's News logo