Um, what happened to this site?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

It's been declining ever since my initiation to this cursed place. Not wanting to take all the credit here, folks. No siree, not desiring to blow me own trumpet at all sir...but i do tend to have a highly degenerative effect on everything around me, so causality may equal correlation in this particular case. Sorry about that there.

...

Well, best be heading on way. Seems night's a fallin and a bed's a callin for a mauling me to sleep.

...

You're welcome

StatusNil:

Worgen:

If gg wanted to actually go after the root cause of blegh 'ethics in games journalism' they would have targeted publishers and worked to stop all their shady shit.

As stated, "games journalism". And while nobody appreciates the shenanigans of the publishers, they at least are performing their role in this market. Which is something the media might want to join the public in countering, instead of pursuing a very different agenda.

Ignoring the primary cause to rant at symptoms was one of GG's many faults, yeah. I mean, flat out ignoring corporate shenanigans because "that's just what they do", but putting up a website to chronicle every time a game's journalist gave some dev 10 bucks on Kickstarter and didn't tell people?

Major Tom:

Lil devils x:
The first one is still there too.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.858347-Zoe-Quinn-and-the-surrounding-controversy

Yeah, stumbled across it not long before you posted. It's weird, I just remembered is as the GG megathread, not its actual title.

I skimmed the first 15 or so pages, and I'm a little disgusted at myself for buying into the 'ethics in games journalism' bullshit. Those first 15 pages are primarily about what a terrible person Quinn is. Hell, the Grayson angle was there from the start, but nobody bothered to care much about it until it was noticed that the big outlets weren't touching that hot mess with a 10 foot pole, then it became all about media censorship....about a topic that was primarily about how terrible a person was. Maybe you could say it exposed nepotism in the industry, but we already knew about that. Why did this actually minor infraction (if that, there was no review and I'm seriously doubting positive press) garner this reaction when far worse breaches lived and died in a matter of weeks and lived only on in memes?

Going through the second thread a bit, the whole ethics in games journalism aspect had a very short shelf life, it morphed very quickly into rooting out that nasty cabal of cultural marxist academics who were plotting to destroy gaming from the inside. I mean, those of us who cared about journalistic integrity got what we wanted, right? A number of gaming sites updated their codes of conduct (and I think it was Polygon's clauses on Kickstarter/Patreon were harsher than they needed to be), made them public and said they'd abide by them, right? That's what we wanted, right? Well, no obviously not. It seems like purging the industry of the.....undesirables had to follow. Oh, the speed at which MundaneMatt was turned on when he stopped saying things that....*wince*....we liked.

I went back and read the 'Gamers are dead' articles, at least the first 12 that came out in quick succession. Sure, Leigh Alexander's piece was unnecessarily rude and aggressive, but the articles made it quite clear what kind of 'gamer' they were talking about and frankly, looking back and even now, they weren't wrong.

In the end, what did Gamergate accomplish? At best nothing. Kotaku, Polygon, RPS, Destructoid, they all still exist and putg out the same sort of content. Gawker's dead, but it wasn't GG that killed it. Greyson is still writing for Kotaku, Quinn's still making games, Sarkesian is still doing her thing, articles being critical of various socio-political aspects of gaming are still being written and people are still complaining about critique. At worst, it created a bogeyman that haunts the internet and casts a shadow over everything related to....well anything it touched. And let's not get into the Youtube aspect of it.

If this sounds a little hostile....well, like I said, I'm angry at myself that I got taken in. I didn't actually expect to write this, I was going to consider it a bit more and collect my thoughts, but hell, it's written now, might as well share it.

Yea, I think there are more people who feel like you do now than you may realize after taking a good look at what all was happening at the time.

It was pretty surreal tbh being a lifetime competitive pvp female gamer and having a bunch of people come in all of a sudden telling me that I should not have an opinion because I apparently do not matter and should not exist because I am "biologically unfit" for gaming. It is like they did not even realize we existed all along, long before they did. That was also the first, and hopefully last time I am told that rape victims are too damaged to be able to discuss rape, that females are not biologically inclined to create and play games, and that it is okay to rape someone as long as the victim does not remember it happening to them. Yea, all that actually happened.

Not to mention of course many in the actual mega thread did not even read the OP of the mega thread and attempted to argue that the escapist and it's staff and content creators were not on a boycott list linked in the OP of the thread. The whole thing was madness. Many involved repeatedly linked completely made up nonsense as " proof". I have never seen so many screens of fake tweets as a "source" prior or since. It was a gaming witch hunt like no other.

I can understand how people can be sucked in by those promoting ethics, as long as they get out when they see what was really happening. People actually went into hiding from the harassment, hired extra body guards and that should never have had to happen. We had members of the community here targeted as well.

Lil devils x:

Major Tom:

Lil devils x:
The first one is still there too.
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.858347-Zoe-Quinn-and-the-surrounding-controversy

Yeah, stumbled across it not long before you posted. It's weird, I just remembered is as the GG megathread, not its actual title.

I skimmed the first 15 or so pages, and I'm a little disgusted at myself for buying into the 'ethics in games journalism' bullshit. Those first 15 pages are primarily about what a terrible person Quinn is. Hell, the Grayson angle was there from the start, but nobody bothered to care much about it until it was noticed that the big outlets weren't touching that hot mess with a 10 foot pole, then it became all about media censorship....about a topic that was primarily about how terrible a person was. Maybe you could say it exposed nepotism in the industry, but we already knew about that. Why did this actually minor infraction (if that, there was no review and I'm seriously doubting positive press) garner this reaction when far worse breaches lived and died in a matter of weeks and lived only on in memes?

Going through the second thread a bit, the whole ethics in games journalism aspect had a very short shelf life, it morphed very quickly into rooting out that nasty cabal of cultural marxist academics who were plotting to destroy gaming from the inside. I mean, those of us who cared about journalistic integrity got what we wanted, right? A number of gaming sites updated their codes of conduct (and I think it was Polygon's clauses on Kickstarter/Patreon were harsher than they needed to be), made them public and said they'd abide by them, right? That's what we wanted, right? Well, no obviously not. It seems like purging the industry of the.....undesirables had to follow. Oh, the speed at which MundaneMatt was turned on when he stopped saying things that....*wince*....we liked.

I went back and read the 'Gamers are dead' articles, at least the first 12 that came out in quick succession. Sure, Leigh Alexander's piece was unnecessarily rude and aggressive, but the articles made it quite clear what kind of 'gamer' they were talking about and frankly, looking back and even now, they weren't wrong.

In the end, what did Gamergate accomplish? At best nothing. Kotaku, Polygon, RPS, Destructoid, they all still exist and putg out the same sort of content. Gawker's dead, but it wasn't GG that killed it. Greyson is still writing for Kotaku, Quinn's still making games, Sarkesian is still doing her thing, articles being critical of various socio-political aspects of gaming are still being written and people are still complaining about critique. At worst, it created a bogeyman that haunts the internet and casts a shadow over everything related to....well anything it touched. And let's not get into the Youtube aspect of it.

If this sounds a little hostile....well, like I said, I'm angry at myself that I got taken in. I didn't actually expect to write this, I was going to consider it a bit more and collect my thoughts, but hell, it's written now, might as well share it.

Yea, I think there are more people who feel like you do now than you may realize after taking a good look at what all was happening at the time.

It was pretty surreal tbh being a lifetime competitive pvp female gamer and having a bunch of people come in all of a sudden telling me that I should not have an opinion because I apparently do not matter and should not exist because I am "biologically unfit" for gaming. It is like they did not even realize we existed all along, long before they did. That was also the first, and hopefully last time I am told that rape victims are too damaged to be able to discuss rape, that females are not biologically inclined to create and play games, and that it is okay to rape someone as long as the victim does not remember it happening to them. Yea, all that actually happened.

Not to mention of course many in the actual mega thread did not even read the OP of the mega thread and attempted to argue that the escapist and it's staff and content creators were not on a boycott list linked in the OP of the thread. The whole thing was madness. Many involved repeatedly linked completely made up nonsense as " proof". I have never seen so many screens of fake tweets as a "source" prior or since. It was a gaming witch hunt like no other.

I can understand how people can be sucked in by those promoting ethics, as long as they get out when they see what was really happening. People actually went into hiding from the harassment, hired extra body guards and that should never have had to happen. We had members of the community here targeted as well.

"Women are biologically unfit to play games." That is the dumbest shit I've heard since the last time I saw a clip of trump talking about anything. I mean if it was a power lifting competition then yeah I can see a woman being at a disadvantage, but this is video games. They are literally biologically equal, actually women should probably be better at them then men are since women tend to be more dexterous with their hands or at least so people say.

Worgen:

Lil devils x:

Major Tom:

Yeah, stumbled across it not long before you posted. It's weird, I just remembered is as the GG megathread, not its actual title.

I skimmed the first 15 or so pages, and I'm a little disgusted at myself for buying into the 'ethics in games journalism' bullshit. Those first 15 pages are primarily about what a terrible person Quinn is. Hell, the Grayson angle was there from the start, but nobody bothered to care much about it until it was noticed that the big outlets weren't touching that hot mess with a 10 foot pole, then it became all about media censorship....about a topic that was primarily about how terrible a person was. Maybe you could say it exposed nepotism in the industry, but we already knew about that. Why did this actually minor infraction (if that, there was no review and I'm seriously doubting positive press) garner this reaction when far worse breaches lived and died in a matter of weeks and lived only on in memes?

Going through the second thread a bit, the whole ethics in games journalism aspect had a very short shelf life, it morphed very quickly into rooting out that nasty cabal of cultural marxist academics who were plotting to destroy gaming from the inside. I mean, those of us who cared about journalistic integrity got what we wanted, right? A number of gaming sites updated their codes of conduct (and I think it was Polygon's clauses on Kickstarter/Patreon were harsher than they needed to be), made them public and said they'd abide by them, right? That's what we wanted, right? Well, no obviously not. It seems like purging the industry of the.....undesirables had to follow. Oh, the speed at which MundaneMatt was turned on when he stopped saying things that....*wince*....we liked.

I went back and read the 'Gamers are dead' articles, at least the first 12 that came out in quick succession. Sure, Leigh Alexander's piece was unnecessarily rude and aggressive, but the articles made it quite clear what kind of 'gamer' they were talking about and frankly, looking back and even now, they weren't wrong.

In the end, what did Gamergate accomplish? At best nothing. Kotaku, Polygon, RPS, Destructoid, they all still exist and putg out the same sort of content. Gawker's dead, but it wasn't GG that killed it. Greyson is still writing for Kotaku, Quinn's still making games, Sarkesian is still doing her thing, articles being critical of various socio-political aspects of gaming are still being written and people are still complaining about critique. At worst, it created a bogeyman that haunts the internet and casts a shadow over everything related to....well anything it touched. And let's not get into the Youtube aspect of it.

If this sounds a little hostile....well, like I said, I'm angry at myself that I got taken in. I didn't actually expect to write this, I was going to consider it a bit more and collect my thoughts, but hell, it's written now, might as well share it.

Yea, I think there are more people who feel like you do now than you may realize after taking a good look at what all was happening at the time.

It was pretty surreal tbh being a lifetime competitive pvp female gamer and having a bunch of people come in all of a sudden telling me that I should not have an opinion because I apparently do not matter and should not exist because I am "biologically unfit" for gaming. It is like they did not even realize we existed all along, long before they did. That was also the first, and hopefully last time I am told that rape victims are too damaged to be able to discuss rape, that females are not biologically inclined to create and play games, and that it is okay to rape someone as long as the victim does not remember it happening to them. Yea, all that actually happened.

Not to mention of course many in the actual mega thread did not even read the OP of the mega thread and attempted to argue that the escapist and it's staff and content creators were not on a boycott list linked in the OP of the thread. The whole thing was madness. Many involved repeatedly linked completely made up nonsense as " proof". I have never seen so many screens of fake tweets as a "source" prior or since. It was a gaming witch hunt like no other.

I can understand how people can be sucked in by those promoting ethics, as long as they get out when they see what was really happening. People actually went into hiding from the harassment, hired extra body guards and that should never have had to happen. We had members of the community here targeted as well.

"Women are biologically unfit to play games." That is the dumbest shit I've heard since the last time I saw a clip of trump talking about anything. I mean if it was a power lifting competition then yeah I can see a woman being at a disadvantage, but this is video games. They are literally biologically equal, actually women should probably be better at them then men are since women tend to be more dexterous with their hands or at least so people say.

Yea, I was told that women were more biologically suited to candy crush than to FPS for this reason. SERIOUSLY. I had some of the most ridiculous conversations in my life during that time period.

EDIT: I also saw many of the female members of this site leave during that due to having that blatant sexism being promoted on the forums and having the "hands off" moderation approach to those promoting these things at the time regardless of what they said.

Lil devils x:

Worgen:

Lil devils x:

Yea, I think there are more people who feel like you do now than you may realize after taking a good look at what all was happening at the time.

It was pretty surreal tbh being a lifetime competitive pvp female gamer and having a bunch of people come in all of a sudden telling me that I should not have an opinion because I apparently do not matter and should not exist because I am "biologically unfit" for gaming. It is like they did not even realize we existed all along, long before they did. That was also the first, and hopefully last time I am told that rape victims are too damaged to be able to discuss rape, that females are not biologically inclined to create and play games, and that it is okay to rape someone as long as the victim does not remember it happening to them. Yea, all that actually happened.

Not to mention of course many in the actual mega thread did not even read the OP of the mega thread and attempted to argue that the escapist and it's staff and content creators were not on a boycott list linked in the OP of the thread. The whole thing was madness. Many involved repeatedly linked completely made up nonsense as " proof". I have never seen so many screens of fake tweets as a "source" prior or since. It was a gaming witch hunt like no other.

I can understand how people can be sucked in by those promoting ethics, as long as they get out when they see what was really happening. People actually went into hiding from the harassment, hired extra body guards and that should never have had to happen. We had members of the community here targeted as well.

"Women are biologically unfit to play games." That is the dumbest shit I've heard since the last time I saw a clip of trump talking about anything. I mean if it was a power lifting competition then yeah I can see a woman being at a disadvantage, but this is video games. They are literally biologically equal, actually women should probably be better at them then men are since women tend to be more dexterous with their hands or at least so people say.

Yea, I was told that women were more biologically suited to candy crush than to FPS for this reason. SERIOUSLY. I had some of the most ridiculous conversations in my life during that time period.

EDIT: I also saw many of the female members of this site leave during that due to having that blatant sexism being promoted on the forums and having the "hands off" moderation approach to those promoting these things at the time regardless of what they said.

Annoyingly, I can believe it. The whole gg thing really had the boys-club dipshits come out of the wood work.

Oh yeah, it's going down.

Kids, don't be like me, or the same thing will happen to you. And then what?

Have fun with GamerGate Megathread, Episode 3: The Bannening. "This time, it's personal. And the personal is political!"

The constant and continued revision of what Gamergate is/was and what happened never ceases to astound me..

We have in this very thread 3 examples for the decline:
Apathy and unwise handling from Site owners.
Rise of other social media (youtube/facebook/reddit) and decline of forums.
Politically biased moderation.

Vendor-Lazarus:
The constant and continued revision of what Gamergate is/was and what happened never ceases to astound me..

We have in this very thread 3 examples for the decline:
Apathy and unwise handling from Site owners.
Rise of other social media (youtube/facebook/reddit) and decline of forums.
Politically biased moderation.

This site turned into a ghost town the moment Gamergate was done with the place. So naturally people are going to make the connection.

Nearest as I can tell, the largest number leavers and bans this forum has ever seen happened right during the time that Gamergate was kicking off.

Lil devils x:
The whole thing was madness. Many involved repeatedly linked completely made up nonsense as " proof". I have never seen so many screens of fake tweets as a "source" prior or since. It was a gaming witch hunt like no other.

I think that's part of the problem. Only very recently, as in last year maybe, has the Internet at large realised how easy faking up a screenshot actually is. Back in Gamergate times a screenshot was authoritative for some reason.

EscapistAccount:

I think that's part of the problem. Only very recently, as in last year maybe, has the Internet at large realised how easy faking up a screenshot actually is. Back in Gamergate times a screenshot was authoritative for some reason.

Nope, at least not on the so-called "Gamergate" side. People were pretty committed to archiving everything it was possible to archive in order to avoid fakes (among other reasons) from the early days.

The media side of course was never known for presenting much in the way of evidence for any of their wild claims.

EscapistAccount:

Lil devils x:
The whole thing was madness. Many involved repeatedly linked completely made up nonsense as " proof". I have never seen so many screens of fake tweets as a "source" prior or since. It was a gaming witch hunt like no other.

I think that's part of the problem. Only very recently, as in last year maybe, has the Internet at large realised how easy faking up a screenshot actually is. Back in Gamergate times a screenshot was authoritative for some reason.

What is this like 2004 again? You would think gamer's would know better than that considering the sheer number of people who faked max hit screens for ages and them receiving their info from 4chan/8chan. Game devs would not even accept screens as proof of anything, I have no idea why these nubs did.

StatusNil:

EscapistAccount:

I think that's part of the problem. Only very recently, as in last year maybe, has the Internet at large realised how easy faking up a screenshot actually is. Back in Gamergate times a screenshot was authoritative for some reason.

Nope, at least not on the so-called "Gamergate" side. People were pretty committed to archiving everything it was possible to archive in order to avoid fakes (among other reasons) from the early days.

The media side of course was never known for presenting much in the way of evidence for any of their wild claims.

You might want to re factcheck the Megathreads. There was quite a bit going on there.

lol, you guys really trying to re-litigate fucking GamerGate? Don't you have anything more productive to do with your time, like banging your head against a wall?

Vendor-Lazarus:
The constant and continued revision of what Gamergate is/was and what happened never ceases to astound me..

We have in this very thread 3 examples for the decline:
Apathy and unwise handling from Site owners.

This is the biggest one, by far, right here.

I'm somebody who really disliked Gamergate (as anybody who remembers my contributions from that time can attest), but it was not the biggest causal factor for what happened to The Escapist. There was a correlation, but no strong causation. A few members-- one or two of them long-standing-- left the site after the tone-of-discussion was affected by Gamergate. I might have been a bit frustrated, but I wasn't one of those, and I don't think the number of people leaving for that reason was terribly high.

...but the site owners, on the other hand? Let go the tech team, allowing ludicrous technical issues go unaddressed; let go the talent, allowing the site to become bereft of almost any creative input; and, started to neglect their supportive duties towards the forums and moderators both.

It's the fault of the site owners. Well, it's about... 85% their fault, anyway: there's some fault leftover for the decline of the forum medium as a whole, and ideological who-hah, some of which was related to Gamergate.

StatusNil:

Ugicywapih:
No, the principal antagonists of proper, healthy and unbiased discourse on games and gaming are a ranty niche feminist blogger, who neither makes games nor reviews them herself and an indie dev who may have, according to some, garnered an elevated review score for a game of hers through (very) indirect personal favours, aren't they?

Gosh, it almost sounds silly if you read it all out loud.

Common misunderstanding. The principal antagonists were the "games journalists" who unanimously championed said ranty scammer and the "indie dev", who did not even get a review score (see Metacritic) because there was nobody who would criticize their "game" in the game critic racket. But they sure as balls acted as her PR, to the point that she's known as "a leading female game developer" across the media to this day, which must sting for actual working female game developers.

The point was always that these journolists (sic) didn't do the job they were pretending to do (which was to serve the public, rather than their socialite cronies), and went out of their way to discredit anyone who tried. Whatever harassment of these spurious celebrities there may have been remains unattributed, and may have consisted largely of rebuttals to claims they were publicly making anyway.

I wouldn't call Quinn a "leading female game dev", don't know where you're getting that. Either way, please do elaborate, why would a large group (an entire profession, pretty much) distributed all the way across the globe create an extensive conspiracy network? These two didn't have the money to pay them all off (back when this all started, especially) and I sincerely doubt Zoe went and slept with everyone involved (this is less an expression of faith in her character and more that of doubt in her physical capabilities).

Plus, I've been around back when both these controversies hit and I distinctly remember Sarkeesian getting a lot of hate (like... a year or so before this came under the banner of journalistic integrity or games journalism, I think) from people bellowing, that this horrid witch besmirching their beloved medium with hollow accusations of sexism will somehow twist the general public's view of games despite her having a very limited audience. I remember the screeching shitfit this segment of the public went into en masse and I remember how *THAT* and the coverage of harassment rather than the merits of her actual work propelled Sarkeesian into fame. Not necessarily deserved fame, mind you, but the ones responsible aren't journalists, game or otherwise, who decided not to stay silent on a topic that generated clicks, but the witless SQWs, who overreacted over a non-issue so hard it became worldwide news.

Now, how "bad" Sarkeesian's impact is relies not just on her ability to effect change, but also on whether there is actual sexism in games and gaming. I've never been a fan of her videos, so I don't feel overly qualified to discuss specific points she raises, but if we can agree gaming, especially in pre-Sarkeesian era was sexist, in comparison to an acceptable baseline, I think we can also agree, that shining a spotlight on this general issue is a step in the right direction for fixing it.

If we are to establish a baseline for sexism in entertainment industry, it makes sense to look at what other media (film, literature and so on) are doing. And honestly, while I'm not really feeling up to doing any research on this right now (so please correct me if you find any hard data that contradicts me), but I feel like I've been seeing way more objectification and negative gender stereotypes in games - not to mention the treatment of girl gamers. I recall a controversy that happened around the time of GG where, during a pro match (in Street Fighter, I think), a guy started throwing rape threats at a girl he was playing against. Granted, he did get banned, but this showcases the fact there's a segment of the community that sees public rape threats as harmless horseplay that wouldn't warrant a second thought from the audience. There are also, of course, many more cases of similar mistreatment a little further from public attention, like so:

Lil devils x:
Yea, I was told that women were more biologically suited to candy crush than to FPS for this reason. SERIOUSLY. I had some of the most ridiculous conversations in my life during that time period.

EDIT: I also saw many of the female members of this site leave during that due to having that blatant sexism being promoted on the forums and having the "hands off" moderation approach to those promoting these things at the time regardless of what they said.

So, in conclusion? I agree Sarkeesian is a hack, but I believe her work, even if devoid of any particularly deep thought or solid knowledge of the subject matter, still deals with an important subject that, prior to the whole debacle, was far too often ignored. And for that, if not for anything else, I can sincerely thank not a corrupt journo cabal pulling the strings from the shadows at no apparent benefit to themselves, but the rabid and senseless GG supporters.

Gethsemani:

WolvDragon:

Worgen:
As far as I can tell the owners awhile back let the gamer gate idiots pull up shop here and that ended up pissing off a lot of the content creators and split the sites user base. Once all that calmed down most of them left but they had managed to push a lot of the other users off the site so we hemorrhaged the rest of our content creators aside from Yahtzee. Keep in mind this might not be accurate, I tend to lurk and not give a damn, I'm mostly going by what I remember others saying.

So Gamergate is to blame then?

Sort of. That Macris, the one who ran the Escapist at the time, came down in favor of GamerGate and that the Escapist was one of the few forums that didn't openly declare in favor for or against GamerGate meant that the Escapist became a battleground of sorts for GG and the Anti-GG crowds. That the Escapist refused to distance itself drove several content creators away and the incredible toxicity that the GG discussion created on the forums drove lots of former members away from the site. Then in an attempt to salvage the site, the Escapist hired on a bunch of new content creators, all of which were chiefly known for their outspoken Pro-GG stance. It turned out that these contributors did not have the draw that was expected. After a disastrous "investigative series" on Star Citizen, which turned out to be rife with breaches of journalistic method and ethics, the Escapist had had too much bad press to recover as a serious source of gaming news. And so all the new content contributors were let go and Yahtzee remains the only thing to update on this site.

In the name of fairness, it should also be pointed out that the Escapist also struggled against the increasing proliferation of YouTube and that a lot of it's early video content (where the Escapist once was on the forefront of gaming media) simply moved on to YouTube to get more creative control and freedom. The Escapist was always the black sheep in that most of its' content came from independent creators that were signed on to post their content to the Escapist, instead of the more traditional way of letting gaming journalists manage content owned by the publication. That's why Sterling still runs the Jimquisition, Young still does Experienced Points (occasionally) and why Extra Credits still goes strong on YouTube. These were always the IPs of their respective creators, who got paid to post it to the Escapist, the Escapist never controlled any of these brands but where more like publishing partners.

Co-signed.

To blame this entirely on GG, as Gethsemani said, misses the mark. The media business has been and continues to be extremely challenging, and there's been a well-documented change in games media in particular with the rise of streamers and independent voices that aren't tied to a particular site or publisher. That's a tough predicament for media companies. As stated above, the Escapist model was different than other popular gaming sites, but it didn't eliminate those challenges. Would the Escapist have survived if it kept Sterling, MovieBob and others? Probably, yeah.

That said....yes, the site's move toward GG definitely had an effect. Macris apparently bought into the whole idea that there was this huge groundswell of gamers that rejected the "SJW" culture and that, if catered to directly, such a groundswell could support the site.

It didn't. Go back and look at some of the posts in the GG megathread about how Kotaku and Polygon and all these other sites were on the verge of business and the questionable web traffic metrics that GGers were using to make their cases, along with conspiracy theories ("Gawker uses bots to inflate traffic!" "Intel never actually restored their ads on Gamasutra!") and other nonsense. They said the Escapist was going to rule and all these "aGG" sites were going the way of the dinosaurs.

Well, those sites are all still around, and this is the one that's on the verge of extinction. I have no idea why Macris did what he did. Maybe he bought into the GG hype and thought there would be this enduring shift in gaming that would send flocks of new visitors to his site. Maybe he bought into all the suspiciously high volume of GG posts/accounts on Twitter and KiA and thought it could sustain the Escapist on its own. Maybe GG just gave him an opening to do what he always wanted to do from a political standpoint. Whatever the case, it was a spectacularly bad decision, and the proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

And finally....when the guy running your games site, who apparently loves to portray himself as a highbrow intellectual and political philosopher, decides to align himself with the likes of MILO FUCKING YIANNOPOULOS and creates a laughing stock of a business with that alt-right clown, well...that should give you an idea of what kind of hands the Escapist was in.

BreakfastMan:
lol, you guys really trying to re-litigate fucking GamerGate? Don't you have anything more productive to do with your time, like banging your head against a wall?

I second this. Let's restart the that forest fire, brilliant idea. >_<

As much as I hate GamerGate and what they stand for (as opposed to what they claim to stand for), to blame them for the downfall of this site as opposed to a combined storm of management and contributor fallouts and personal agendas doesn't really jive with me.

WolvDragon:

Worgen:
As far as I can tell the owners awhile back let the gamer gate idiots pull up shop here and that ended up pissing off a lot of the content creators and split the sites user base. Once all that calmed down most of them left but they had managed to push a lot of the other users off the site so we hemorrhaged the rest of our content creators aside from Yahtzee. Keep in mind this might not be accurate, I tend to lurk and not give a damn, I'm mostly going by what I remember others saying.

So Gamergate is to blame then?

Nah, the site was dwindling way before gamergate, and the "put up shop here". Most of the people he's disparaging were regulars on the site. The whole mess was a regular community rift not some outside invading force. A couple of the worse content creators like Bob completely lost their minds and started publicly attacking users on social media, got told to shut up by their bosses, didn't, and got let go. After that, a lot of people stuck around but the factions and rift in the community remained for a long time, in fact most of the current "those guys" are from the two main camps back then. Defy let the tech team go a couple of years ago so the site started to have technical issues, as well as that we got a rules free subforum (The Wild West) which was pubclub only and probably the single most active subforum here despite that, helped by the tech team giving all active users pubclub on the way out. The active staff dwindled away, and got pseudo replaced by members of the mod team stepping into roles as best they could, and then most recently they shut the WW forum and drove another set of active users off to other sites built to act as user made backups to this forum in case of total existence failure.

I hope that gives a decent view of it.

vallorn:

WolvDragon:

Worgen:
As far as I can tell the owners awhile back let the gamer gate idiots pull up shop here and that ended up pissing off a lot of the content creators and split the sites user base. Once all that calmed down most of them left but they had managed to push a lot of the other users off the site so we hemorrhaged the rest of our content creators aside from Yahtzee. Keep in mind this might not be accurate, I tend to lurk and not give a damn, I'm mostly going by what I remember others saying.

So Gamergate is to blame then?

Nah, the site was dwindling way before gamergate, and the "put up shop here". Most of the people he's disparaging were regulars on the site. The whole mess was a regular community rift not some outside invading force. A couple of the worse content creators like Bob completely lost their minds and started publicly attacking users on social media, got told to shut up by their bosses, didn't, and got let go. After that, a lot of people stuck around but the factions and rift in the community remained for a long time, in fact most of the current "those guys" are from the two main camps back then. Defy let the tech team go a couple of years ago so the site started to have technical issues, as well as that we got a rules free subforum (The Wild West) which was pubclub only and probably the single most active subforum here despite that, helped by the tech team giving all active users pubclub on the way out. The active staff dwindled away, and got pseudo replaced by members of the mod team stepping into roles as best they could, and then most recently they shut the WW forum and drove another set of active users off to other sites built to act as user made backups to this forum in case of total existence failure.

I hope that gives a decent view of it.

MovieBob...How the heck did a guy who made interesting content, goes out of his way to attack people on twitter? Reminds me of a certain politician with orange hair.

Lil devils x:

EscapistAccount:

Lil devils x:
The whole thing was madness. Many involved repeatedly linked completely made up nonsense as " proof". I have never seen so many screens of fake tweets as a "source" prior or since. It was a gaming witch hunt like no other.

I think that's part of the problem. Only very recently, as in last year maybe, has the Internet at large realised how easy faking up a screenshot actually is. Back in Gamergate times a screenshot was authoritative for some reason.

What is this like 2004 again? You would think gamer's would know better than that considering the sheer number of people who faked max hit screens for ages and them receiving their info from 4chan/8chan. Game devs would not even accept screens as proof of anything, I have no idea why these nubs did.

It may as well be, no one ever learned the lesson. See how easy it still is to incite an online mob by posting a few shooped tweets.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.1055188-In-Regards-to-Wild-West?page=10#24238924

traffic peaked in March 2012, with a slow decline ever since (well, there was a cliff-like drop in late 2014 when Jim and Bob left)

Site with no content, no visitors it gets.

On a site with no journalists, this place sure gets into a lot of arguments over the ethics of those journalists. I think, the only move forward now (and this is important) is to take everything you all said here. And never say them again. No, no. I know I can hear you furiously typing already but listen. There are no journalists here. They all got scooped out. So there is no one here for you to impart your influence on, or sway in this most important conversation. Sooooo, when you find yourself wanting to type in "gg" together. Don't. Sure, we will lose words like "digging", but that's a small price to pay I feel.

This is literally just playing chicken with the mods at this point to see how far you can female reproductive cell on each other before you end up like ol' StatusNil here. And while I feel he's doing God's work, God is dead, so why bother!

Instead of dwelling on why this place died, I think we should look toward the future. And the future is sailing this malevolent dead site into other sites, and flooding their forums with our presence, like some horrific undead pirates from a Disney film franchise. Just joining up as one, adding (Escapist) to the end of our names, and reeking pure havoc upon the unsuspecting masses. They don't even have to be gaming sites! I think this is the only end game we can collectively agree on.

Oh boy this thread is sure looking fun. Also duly noted that Worgen is allowed to throw insults and StatusNIL is not. Since I know what pit I've gotten put in I'll assume the double standard applies to me as well and keep this more civil than those otherwise privileged. Always idea good for moderation on a site that is struggling to be openly hostile to active members.

Lets talk about what makes a site like this profitable for a moment, page views. Do you think forum wars are bad for page views? is controversy? To blame something that likely profited the site for it's down fall is a bit ignorant of the realities of the economics around a publication. I think like many other publications it was a resultant spiral of content creators seeing greener pastures on youtube and patreon which in turn hurts a sites ability to finance new content thus costing them more creators.

EC, financial dispute followed by seeking to be independent
Jim, outright said greener pastures
Bob, basically forced them to fire him imho to also seek independence

Johnlives:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.1055188-In-Regards-to-Wild-West?page=10#24238924

traffic peaked in March 2012, with a slow decline ever since (well, there was a cliff-like drop in late 2014 when Jim and Bob left)

Site with no content, no visitors it gets.

Of course the date in this link just has to be a coincidence...
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.1055507-Um-what-happened-to-this-site#24246228
The decline after 2012 was happening all over the web with forums, however the reason for the cliff started in August of 2014...

They did not decide to just up and leave over nothing.

Well, hindsight has taught anyone involved that allowing the discussion of GG to happen in this community has done more harm than good, and should never have been allowed, as it was shunned by other gaming and "nerd" communities.

n0e:
Well, hindsight has taught anyone involved that allowing the discussion of GG to happen in this community has done more harm than good, and should never have been allowed, as it was shunned by other gaming and "nerd" communities.

Yes, lets "disallow talks" (ban speech) about nepotism and corruption in game journalism circles for forums of game enthusiasts.
I especially liked the twisting of words when you said "shunned" by gaming communites. It wasn't shunned. It was banned.
If anything, the restrictions caused even more people to want talk about it where allowed.

Typical.

It shouldn't have been allowed because the topic itself was so toxic it only created a divide in a community. No one wants that. Those that do are the ones that wanted to create the discourse to using that topic as an excuse.

Also, this is a private forum. Just like nearly every other forum on the internet save 4chan. There is no "free speech" as you would want it to be. You're allowed to discuss topics that the powers-that-be deem appropriate.

Vendor-Lazarus:

n0e:
Well, hindsight has taught anyone involved that allowing the discussion of GG to happen in this community has done more harm than good, and should never have been allowed, as it was shunned by other gaming and "nerd" communities.

Yes, lets "disallow talks" (ban speech) about nepotism and corruption in game journalism circles for forums of game enthusiasts.
I especially liked the twisting of words when you said "shunned" by gaming communites. It wasn't shunned. It was banned.
If anything, the restrictions caused even more people to want talk about it where allowed.

Uh-huh. And what good did allowing the discussions here at the Escapist do? You still had GGers claiming verifiably false things -- that Kotaku wrote a non-existent review of Zoe Quinn's, or that Eron Gjoni's blog post, or that an indie developer/non-journalist should be blamed for allegedly rampant corruption in the games media world. Are the "enthusiasts" who flocked her to discuss it less ignorant -- or more? And what good did it non-GGers who arguing against the whole thing? Not only did it turn a lot of folks off from this site, but it wasn't a picnic for the folks that stayed. I, for example, have been accused of several unseemly things, including but not limited to being transphobic, trying to out GGers' identities, harassing forum members, and, best of all, driving a forum member to a suicide attempt. Oh, and I've also been targeted by forums members here offline, who have tried to get me banned from the site repeatedly and have also tried to find out my real name and contact info (I'm sure it was just to get me on their Christmas card lists).

Also, what good did it do the Escapist as a business? Where are all the GGers now? I was told there were huge numbers. Well, Macris tried to build a home for you. You were give basically free reign to discuss this conspiracy bullshit here and spin whatever allegations or smears you wanted. The outspoken GG critics on staff were either shown the door or left, and they were replaced with GG supporters. So what happened? Did you guys all go to TechRaptor (LOL...). Come on, where you at?

WolvDragon:
I guess I already answered my own question, but what happened to this place?

A loss of content is definitely part of it, but more and more I think the major cause of the strife is the culture of the site as it developed over time. This thread is a prime example - we have people coming out of the woodwork who barely post anymore to dredge up years old grudges and complaints over a social media campaign.

GG is dead. Has been for what, three or four years? One job and a set of letters ago for me, so a long ass time. And yet the anger is still fresh for a lot of people who still at least lurk this site. Any website that cultivates that kind of environment and culture is doomed. Sides don't even enter into it, the fact alone that the people who make up the site still can't let go is all it takes to ensure it will never make it back from the edge.

Rest assured, if it wasn't GG it would be ME3, COD, the fappening or something else being dredged up this long after.

Vendor-Lazarus:

Yes, lets "disallow talks" (ban speech) about nepotism and corruption in game journalism circles for forums of game enthusiasts.

Sorry, but David J, Aurini already spilled the beans. It was always meant to be a right wing bulwark in the culture war.

I can only hope it's actually dead now.

EvilRoy:

GG is dead. Has been for what, three or four years? One job and a set of letters ago for me, so a long ass time. And yet the anger is still fresh for a lot of people who still at least lurk this site.

I don't think the war is over, just in cease fire at best.

Another of these threads and again the same garbage being shoveled i seems. Well, might as well get my shovel again.

n0e:
Well, hindsight has taught anyone involved that allowing the discussion of GG to happen in this community has done more harm than good, and should never have been allowed, as it was shunned by other gaming and "nerd" communities.

You are trying to blame a topic being allowed to be discussed rather than the behavior and actions of those who threw a temper tantrum because didn't want it to be allowed to be discussed, or the folks who actively allowed, if not encouraged, that sort of toxic behavior because they either didn't want to deal with their responsibility, or openly supported the hostility, demonizing, trolling garbage because of the cause it was done in the name of.

That is like blaming the victims of a mass murder for making the killer upset in the first place.

So no, it was not allowing the discussion that was the problem, especially when it was one of only a few larger gaming sites that did not ban it outright as the gaming media actively worked together to try to protect their friends and cover up their own screw-ups in ethical and professional behavior.

No, the problem was to allow it in a forum where you had users actively weaponize the rules to make it as hostile and vindictive as possible while still trying to blame it on the people being hit by such behavior like an abusive boyfriend saying they only hit you because you make them. And add in a moderation and management that actively encouraged and rewarded that toxic behavior by letting the passive aggressiveness, vindictive snipping remarks, and mean-girl like clique culture to dominant and drive everyone else either out or force them to adapt to the new normal, while actively whining about having to actually bare responsibility for how their rule over the community was shaping how people behaved and thus making the community into the passive aggressive cesspool it was being viewed as.

What made the place "shunned" as a forum while communities like even KiA grew so large over such a short time was the fact that people rejected that the site itself allowed bullshit behaviors allowed by some but not others in this place, and with nothing content-wise to draw them in out of interest, the forums were widely seen as a cesspool of passive-aggressive jerks from those on the outside looking in. And considering it was the very nature of fostering and even rewarding those sorts of users by the folks with the actual power to change things who would instead complain about those unhappy with the site like they were ungrateful peasants rather than actually trying to address the problems and solve them for once, that isn't an incorrect view of things.

n0e:
Typical.

It shouldn't have been allowed because the topic itself was so toxic it only created a divide in a community. No one wants that. Those that do are the ones that wanted to create the discourse to using that topic as an excuse.

Also, this is a private forum. Just like nearly every other forum on the internet save 4chan. There is no "free speech" as you would want it to be. You're allowed to discuss topics that the powers-that-be deem appropriate.

What made it "toxic" was not the topic, but the methods and behaviors allowed when discussing it. The actions and mindsets of those so violently opposed to it that they poisoned the site with their every worthless snarky remark, their every open support of a banjumping parasite, and their every blaming their shitty behaviors on other people being allowed to even talk about a topic they personally did not like.

But please, keep blaming topic of conversation, and not the people who willingly cheered the death of the site for daring to allow it in the first place.

EDIT: Not worth the effort to respond.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked