How gamergate ruined games

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

Wrex Brogan:

Headdrivehardscrew:
I like labels.

They allow me to spontaneously cook up a curry without having to go through all the pots and jars of brownish, yellowish or reddish powders trying to figure out what's what. I also like to label my books and sort my CD collection so I can find shit.

I don't much appreciate labels on human beings outside of work, as it tends to dehumanize them.

I am pro GG, for what it's worth. I am pro GG and that was why I was faced with adversity on this forum way before the gloves came off for good. It's why I left it to rot and come back to see it live out its days in eternal undeath.

It's what inspired me to get back into learning the wonderful Japanese language, as the Japanese are true masters of escapism. Mock them all you want for their supposed repressed nature. You've probably never fucked a Japanese. They're great. They appreciate good sex. Their sweat tastes of adventure and their games provide me with the escapism I seek. Anybody even just trying to fuck with that... I don't like you very much. I do not appreciate it when them folks try to tell me what is and isn't acceptable. Fuck hat noise. We've overcome Jack Thompson only to be faced with a whole generation of regressive rabble-rousers dreaming of that sweet, sweet revolution extravaganza? The Japanese have dick museums and days dedicated to praising dicks. Just about every mushroom or vegetable is a sexual innuendo. Sure, there is censorship for sexual content in Japan... that sucks, but even with the most extreme and disturbing panels/images/scenes, it usually consists of but some pixellation or limited camera angles. I greatly prefer that over the constant baying of muh misogyny.

I don't like Ashley Burch. She's one of you. And yet she did an excellent job with Horizon: Zero Dawn. I didn't feel indecently touched by any agenda when going for the platinum trophy. The only thing that annoyed the pants off my head was the fact that all the Mad Max furry crap our heroine was facing when it came to the big old wardrobe question kinda looked samey and lame. Don't even get me started on the Antiriad suit. Handy, sure, but just another lame patch of fur with a bit of a special effect over it. We can't let the player enjoy their sweet ass achievement by making every other YouTube gamer look lame in comparison, can we. That's how it felt to me. Do I now need to formulate that as a thesis and spread my intellectual farts over forty pages, complete with made-up customer reactions and questionnaires, feeding bs numbers into SPSS because I just can't be arsed to interact with real people? Hell no.

GamerGate was back when a bunch of colluding regressive fucks thought they'd gained critical mass, and they launched an attack on a supposed, oversimplified idea of an identity on one of the most varied communities of them all, and all they did was to divide it along political lines. Fuck them and fuck everyone who thinks that's cool.

Every push I will answer in kind.
Every shove I will make you regret.

I am GamerGate.

...is this a copy paste? This feels like a copy paste.

Fuck, I hope it's a copy paste.

I don't think it is, we still haven't quite managed to reach Youtube levels of dialogue around here.

Metalix Knightmare:

I'd also like to know how bashing on a woman who cheated on her boyfriend with five different guys, at least one of whom was married and the wife got into a pretty heated argument with her on that subject, all the while gaslighting the poor sap into thinking he was being paranoid and a bad boyfriend, is somehow anti-feminist.

Don't even get me started on those who claimed she was being Slut-Shamed. Anyone who knows the history of THAT particular word should've been more than a little P.O.ed at seeing it used to defend Quinn.

Hell, the biggest reason feminism even entered the discussion to begin with is because most of the people defending Quinn tried to paint the people asking questions about the whole mess as nothing but a pack of mysogonerds.

Funny thing is the reason I got into GG in the first place was because Phil "Japanese Games Suck" Fish was one of the people's cock LW sucked. Add that with the seemingly worsening review performance for Japanese Games was enough to convince me to their side's arguments rather than the appeal for emotions.

gyrobot:

Metalix Knightmare:

I'd also like to know how bashing on a woman who cheated on her boyfriend with five different guys, at least one of whom was married and the wife got into a pretty heated argument with her on that subject, all the while gaslighting the poor sap into thinking he was being paranoid and a bad boyfriend, is somehow anti-feminist.

Don't even get me started on those who claimed she was being Slut-Shamed. Anyone who knows the history of THAT particular word should've been more than a little P.O.ed at seeing it used to defend Quinn.

Hell, the biggest reason feminism even entered the discussion to begin with is because most of the people defending Quinn tried to paint the people asking questions about the whole mess as nothing but a pack of mysogonerds.

Funny thing is the reason I got into GG in the first place was because Phil "Japanese Games Suck" Fish was one of the people's cock LW sucked. Add that with the seemingly worsening review performance for Japanese Games was enough to convince me to their side's arguments rather than the appeal for emotions.

Minor correction, I'm PRETTY certain Phil never slept with Zoe. At the very least nothing ever came up to indicate that beyond how fervently Phil was in defending her (to the point of openly shitting on a guy Zoe sexually harassed at a wedding) and given how many people HERE still defender her, that's not exactly solid proof.

Nielas:

Metalix Knightmare:

I'd also like to know how bashing on a woman who cheated on her boyfriend with five different guys, at least one of whom was married and the wife got into a pretty heated argument with her on that subject, all the while gaslighting the poor sap into thinking he was being paranoid and a bad boyfriend, is somehow anti-feminist.

Don't even get me started on those who claimed she was being Slut-Shamed. Anyone who knows the history of THAT particular word should've been more than a little P.O.ed at seeing it used to defend Quinn.

Hell, the biggest reason feminism even entered the discussion to begin with is because most of the people defending Quinn tried to paint the people asking questions about the whole mess as nothing but a pack of mysogonerds.

My view on the matter is that it was a private matter who Quinn slept with and whether she cheated on her boyfriend. It is really no business of the Internet Gossip Hens. The only thing that was of public interest in the whole affair was whether Grayson gave her a positive review after she slept with him. That aspect was discredited yet people still wanted to discuss her sexual history as a way of shaming her. It lacked basic human decency.

It lacked basic human decency? Funny. So does Quinn by all accounts. Hell, during that court case against Eron, she actually managed to disgust Eron's lawyer to the point where he either discounted his costs or went full pro bono.

I want to reiterate, Zoe Quinn offended a freaking LAWYER to such a degree that he waived further fees for his client.

Also, it's not the fact that Zoe cheated on Eron. If she'd slept with moving guys, or made it with a hockey team the whole drama would've been forgotten in a week at most and Quinn would go on with her crowning achievement being a depression simulator where you can't commit suicide. It's WHO she slept with. See, there's this thing called conflict of interest that's kind of a big deal in journalistic circles. Sleeping with someone you're covering? Yeah. That's a big one.

That's not even getting into the fact that the response to that being dug up was to circle the wagons and start banning any and all discussion of it where possible, basically kicking off the Streisand Effect. If they'd just apologized for the mess and gave Grayson a slap on the wrist, it would've ended when Destiny came out. Instead they started insulting large swaths of their audience.

So question for all the pro GGers. What did this all accomplish? You talk about how great GG is, but how did the average gamer benefit? I've only heard vague things of sites re writing codes of conduct. So what? What happened to make all this worth it?

erttheking:
So question for all the pro GGers. What did this all accomplish? You talk about how great GG is, but how did the average gamer benefit? I've only heard vague things of sites re writing codes of conduct. So what? What happened to make all this worth it?

Well, I wasn't involved, but I see waaaay less of certain people running their mouths and that's certainly a plus.

Not to mention that this was going to happen one way or the other. Some stupid ideas needed to be purged and certain p?eople needed to be oostracized, seems to have worked prety well overall. I mean, some of them haven't given up, buit for the most part we got rid of the really bad crazies.

Fischgopf:

erttheking:
So question for all the pro GGers. What did this all accomplish? You talk about how great GG is, but how did the average gamer benefit? I've only heard vague things of sites re writing codes of conduct. So what? What happened to make all this worth it?

Well, I wasn't involved, but I see waaaay less of certain people running their mouths and that's certainly a plus.

Not to mention that this was going to happen one way or the other. Some stupid ideas needed to be purged and certain p?eople needed to be oostracized, seems to have worked prety well overall. I mean, some of them haven't given up, buit for the most part we got rid of the really bad crazies.

Not really. Plenty of people still do. We're still having the same old arguments. The anti SJW crowd are just the ones raising a stink now.

Examples?

erttheking:

Fischgopf:

erttheking:
So question for all the pro GGers. What did this all accomplish? You talk about how great GG is, but how did the average gamer benefit? I've only heard vague things of sites re writing codes of conduct. So what? What happened to make all this worth it?

Well, I wasn't involved, but I see waaaay less of certain people running their mouths and that's certainly a plus.

Not to mention that this was going to happen one way or the other. Some stupid ideas needed to be purged and certain p?eople needed to be oostracized, seems to have worked prety well overall. I mean, some of them haven't given up, buit for the most part we got rid of the really bad crazies.

Not really. Plenty of people still do. We're still having the same old arguments. The anti SJW crowd are just the ones raising a stink now.

Examples?

But why wouldn't we be having the same arguments? The arguments aren't the problem, it's how they are conducted, the weird us vs them mentality so many people were putting on display. I don't want to speak for everyone, but I know that plenty of people stopped taking part because they got the feeling that you aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions on things without getting dogpiled. That obviously hasn't entirely stopped, Assholes are gonna Asshole, but I do think it's gotten better...with the possible exception of all the insanity surrounding the Election and the aftermath...in that case...Americans gonna American xD

And if the Anti-SJW are raising a stink, either I haven't noticed or you and I have different ideas of what a Anti-SJW is. And if they were, I'd consider it a good thing. I don't consider SJWs to be good people, but bad people perverting good causes for personal gratification...but then again, I doubt we are on the same page on what exactly a SJW even is.

Examples of what exactly?

Fischgopf:

erttheking:

Fischgopf:

Well, I wasn't involved, but I see waaaay less of certain people running their mouths and that's certainly a plus.

Not to mention that this was going to happen one way or the other. Some stupid ideas needed to be purged and certain p?eople needed to be oostracized, seems to have worked prety well overall. I mean, some of them haven't given up, buit for the most part we got rid of the really bad crazies.

Not really. Plenty of people still do. We're still having the same old arguments. The anti SJW crowd are just the ones raising a stink now.

Examples?

But why wouldn't we be having the same arguments? The arguments aren't the problem, it's how they are conducted, the weird us vs them mentality so many people were putting on display. I don't want to speak for everyone, but I know that plenty of people stopped taking part because they got the feeling that you aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions on things without getting dogpiled. That obviously hasn't entirely stopped, Assholes are gonna Asshole, but I do think it's gotten better...with the possible exception of all the insanity surrounding the Election and the aftermath...in that case...Americans gonna American xD

And if the Anti-SJW are raising a stink, either I haven't noticed or you and I have different ideas of what a Anti-SJW is. And if they were, I'd consider it a good thing. I don't consider SJWs to be good people, but bad people perverting good causes for personal gratification...but then again, I doubt we are on the same page on what exactly a SJW even is.

Examples of what exactly?

TBH I feel like GG only made that worse. I feel like we've only gotten civility back up pre GG levels, which weren't impressive.

Bad term, but I basically see people flipping out very easily and making big deals out of minor things. Fire Emblem Fates, Yooka Laylee, Overwatch (Tracer's ass and the addition of Zayria) Street Fighter, Bravely Default 2, it takes little to get them going.

Of ideas purged and people ostracized (also, not gonna lie, kind of creepy terms to use)

Metalix Knightmare:
Also, it's not the fact that Zoe cheated on Eron. If she'd slept with moving guys, or made it with a hockey team the whole drama would've been forgotten in a week at most and Quinn would go on with her crowning achievement being a depression simulator where you can't commit suicide. It's WHO she slept with. See, there's this thing called conflict of interest that's kind of a big deal in journalistic circles. Sleeping with someone you're covering? Yeah. That's a big one.

I don't know if the original post is still here, but scroll back through it. It totally is the fact that she cheated on her boyfriend. People invented the idea of a conflict of interest once people started to ask inconvenient questions about why they were so interested in unverified allegations regarding random woman's sex life made by a vindictive ex.

Also, in actual professional circles people sometimes fuck. People also make friends, have private conversations and do all kinds of other things which could compromise their supposed neutrality, because when you are involved in an industry a disproportionate number of the people you meet will also be involved in the same industry. Exactly at what point this crosses the line into impropriety is unclear and largely a matter for their employer, since contrary to what Gamergaters tend to claim there is no universal and established code of ethics which applies to all forms of journalism. The idea of journalistic ethics is, for the most part, voluntary.

Furthermore, even if one does consider sleeping with people who work in the same general industry your job covers to cross an ethical line, that would be the failure of the guys in question, since they were the ones with journalistic careers, they were the ones whose interests would have been conflicted, they are the ones who should have been aware of their responsibility as journalists. The only reason it makes sense to hold Quinn responsible is a) she sexually assaulted them and they had no choice in the matter or b) it's not actually about journalism at all, and the wrongdoing here is in fact something completely different. Which one is your money on?

Face it, this whole thing has nothing to do with journalism at all. It's about punishing "baddies", and Quinn is a "baddie" so she deserves to be punished, even if punishing her involves the exposure of personal information and unverified allegations without her consent and other things which, if they happened to someone who was a "goodie" would probably make the perpetrators a "baddie".

Also, lawyers work for free all the time. I grew up with parents in the legal profession, and I've never met a lawyer who doesn't work for free for charitable reasons or to support causes which they care about. Lawyers generally care deeply about the law, after all. That's why they become lawyers. One of the best forms of activism is to win cases, thus creating precedent and effectively changing the way law is interpreted on a state or national level, pro bono work is an effective way for lawyers to influence the legal process as a whole as it encourages clients to press cases they might otherwise not for fear of financial consequences, thus giving them a higher chance of winning and building precedent for legal arguments and interpretations the lawyer in question cares about. If a lawyer believes that the use of a restraining order to limit the exposure of personal information without consent is a violation of the first amendment, for example, they will probably take cases pertinent to this for free, as it gives them an opportunity to advance that interpretation. It doesn't mean they're right or that they have a personal grudge against the prosecution.

It was Chuck Wendig who described the GG movement (among others) as "a pack of sad dinosaurs shaking their tiny arms at the meteor above". No I don't think GG ruined games, because they are relatively powerless to stop a billion dollar industry that, at the end of the day, they still keep supporting. They also can't roll back the clock when that industry tries to acknowledge and sell to people other than the stereotypical gamer, nor when that industry chooses to acknowledge the individuals who have a point to make.

If anything, games have gotten better, and continue to get better at a rate faster than my income and time can permit me to enjoy.

erttheking:
So question for all the pro GGers. What did this all accomplish? You talk about how great GG is, but how did the average gamer benefit? I've only heard vague things of sites re writing codes of conduct. So what? What happened to make all this worth it?

That and gawker being taken down primarily. I guess we can say that it made us more aware of biases in our press such that we more critically examine these sites in the future and not just believe them without thinking. That and some of the reactionary websites that were created to make up for the lack of journalistic integrity such as nichegamer are imo pretty great.

Dreiko:

erttheking:
So question for all the pro GGers. What did this all accomplish? You talk about how great GG is, but how did the average gamer benefit? I've only heard vague things of sites re writing codes of conduct. So what? What happened to make all this worth it?

That and gawker being taken down primarily. I guess we can say that it made us more aware of biases in our press such that we more critically examine these sites in the future and not just believe them without thinking. That and some of the reactionary websites that were created to make up for the lack of journalistic integrity such as nichegamer are imo pretty great.

HUH? The gawker ordeal was over hulk hogan not gamer gate, and not even really about Hulk Hogan, it was REALLY about Peter Thiel's vendetta over them outing him as being gay. Gamerggate really did not impact them as much as they thought they were and most of Gawker and Kotaku was remained untouched as they are still running after being bought out.

Kotaku was GG primary target there, and them and Jezebel for example, are still going strong. I do not think Gamer gate can really take credit for Peter Thiel's vendetta. Peter held a grudge because they forced him out of the closet against his will. Which yea, was a pretty shitty thing to do in the first place even if Peter is no angel himself.

Peter would have taken out Gawker even if Gamergate had never existed, they are pretty irrelevant to that tbh.

Lil devils x:

Dreiko:

erttheking:
So question for all the pro GGers. What did this all accomplish? You talk about how great GG is, but how did the average gamer benefit? I've only heard vague things of sites re writing codes of conduct. So what? What happened to make all this worth it?

That and gawker being taken down primarily. I guess we can say that it made us more aware of biases in our press such that we more critically examine these sites in the future and not just believe them without thinking. That and some of the reactionary websites that were created to make up for the lack of journalistic integrity such as nichegamer are imo pretty great.

HUH? The gawker ordeal was over hulk hogan not gamer gate, and not even really about Hulk Hogan, it was REALLY about Peter Thiel's vendetta over them outing him as being gay. Gamerggate really did not impact them as much as they thought they were and most of Gawker and Kotaku was remained untouched as they are still running after being bought out.

Kotaku was GG primary target there, and them and Jezebel for example, are still going strong. I do not think Gamer gate can really take credit for Peter Thiel's vendetta. Peter held a grudge because they forced him out of the closet against his will. Which yea, was a pretty shitty thing to do in the first place even if Peter is no angel himself.

Peter would have taken out Gawker even if Gamergate had never existed, they are pretty irrelevant to that tbh.

According to gawker, the campaign against them caused them damage in the 7 figures, the Hogan event was obviously the biggest impact but I can hardly call 7 figures as absolutely no impact either.

Dreiko:

Lil devils x:

Dreiko:

That and gawker being taken down primarily. I guess we can say that it made us more aware of biases in our press such that we more critically examine these sites in the future and not just believe them without thinking. That and some of the reactionary websites that were created to make up for the lack of journalistic integrity such as nichegamer are imo pretty great.

HUH? The gawker ordeal was over hulk hogan not gamer gate, and not even really about Hulk Hogan, it was REALLY about Peter Thiel's vendetta over them outing him as being gay. Gamerggate really did not impact them as much as they thought they were and most of Gawker and Kotaku was remained untouched as they are still running after being bought out.

Kotaku was GG primary target there, and them and Jezebel for example, are still going strong. I do not think Gamer gate can really take credit for Peter Thiel's vendetta. Peter held a grudge because they forced him out of the closet against his will. Which yea, was a pretty shitty thing to do in the first place even if Peter is no angel himself.

Peter would have taken out Gawker even if Gamergate had never existed, they are pretty irrelevant to that tbh.

According to gawker, the campaign against them caused them damage in the 7 figures, the Hogan event was obviously the biggest impact but I can hardly call 7 figures as absolutely no impact either.

Yes, they had an impact, but no they were not responsible for their take down as much as they were responsible for staff replacement:

Ultimately, the gamergate controversy had more of an effect on Gawker's management than its bottom line. The company's revenue has increased 30 percent year-over-year, and Denton announced to the newsroom before the all-hands meeting that the 2015 editorial budget is $14 million. But the internal dissension over gamergate was one of the things that prompted Denton to replace Johnson with Craggs and name a seven-person managing partnership to run the company.

http://www.politico.com/media/story/2014/12/gawker-discusses-cost-of-gamergate-003205

The staff replacement however had no impact in the end due to Peter taking them out.
IN addition, Gamergate's target was primarily Kotaku, who still remains writing bad things about gamer gate even now, so they pretty much missed their target all together..
https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/03/scumbags-harass-woman-for-working-on-mass-effect-andromedas-animations/

http://kotaku.com/from-gold-farming-to-gamergate-the-gaming-ties-of-dona-1789494823

The questions was "what did they achieve?" not "did they achieve their stated goal?". I answered that question.

Dreiko:
The questions was "what did they achieve?" not "did they achieve their stated goal?". I answered that question.

This is true, though moreso because Gamergate never coalesced around a specific stated goal. In fact, they were vehement about not having a mission statement or any victory conditions, asserting repeatedly that making their nature so difficult to pin down would give them an advantage in maneuverability over their opponents. Obviously, that didn't work because all it resulted in was them spending more time trying to justify their existence than actually accomplishing anything positive.

BeetleManiac:

Dreiko:
The questions was "what did they achieve?" not "did they achieve their stated goal?". I answered that question.

This is true, though moreso because Gamergate never coalesced around a specific stated goal. In fact, they were vehement about not having a mission statement or any victory conditions, asserting repeatedly that making their nature so difficult to pin down would give them an advantage in maneuverability over their opponents. Obviously, that didn't work because all it resulted in was them spending more time trying to justify their existence than actually accomplishing anything positive.

Yep, that's a fair. I'd still call that better than what I'd expect people randomly posting on a twitter hashtag to normally accomplish in the real world though XD.

Dreiko:
Yep, that's a fair. I'd still call that better than what I'd expect people randomly posting on a twitter hashtag to normally accomplish in the real world though XD.

It's actually about what I would expect in the 21st century if you can get a couple thousand whiny, insecure shitposters to direct their anger at a handful of targets they've wanted to attack for years.

Still, fact remains that Gamergate's influence was nowhere near what they claimed it to be, and the insistence of the diehards that they're still relevant and a force to be reckoned with is almost tragic in how you see human beings pissing their lives away to satisfy petty grudges based largely on imagined sleights.

erttheking:

Fischgopf:

erttheking:

Not really. Plenty of people still do. We're still having the same old arguments. The anti SJW crowd are just the ones raising a stink now.

Examples?

But why wouldn't we be having the same arguments? The arguments aren't the problem, it's how they are conducted, the weird us vs them mentality so many people were putting on display. I don't want to speak for everyone, but I know that plenty of people stopped taking part because they got the feeling that you aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions on things without getting dogpiled. That obviously hasn't entirely stopped, Assholes are gonna Asshole, but I do think it's gotten better...with the possible exception of all the insanity surrounding the Election and the aftermath...in that case...Americans gonna American xD

And if the Anti-SJW are raising a stink, either I haven't noticed or you and I have different ideas of what a Anti-SJW is. And if they were, I'd consider it a good thing. I don't consider SJWs to be good people, but bad people perverting good causes for personal gratification...but then again, I doubt we are on the same page on what exactly a SJW even is.

Examples of what exactly?

TBH I feel like GG only made that worse. I feel like we've only gotten civility back up pre GG levels, which weren't impressive.

Bad term, but I basically see people flipping out very easily and making big deals out of minor things. Fire Emblem Fates, Yooka Laylee, Overwatch (Tracer's ass and the addition of Zayria) Street Fighter, Bravely Default 2, it takes little to get them going.

Of ideas purged and people ostracized (also, not gonna lie, kind of creepy terms to use)

Wouldn't really call the removal of a gameplay mechanic, butchering of several storylines (Fire Emblem Fates, and the removal of an entire ending (Bravely Default 2) to be minor things.

BeetleManiac:

Dreiko:
Yep, that's a fair. I'd still call that better than what I'd expect people randomly posting on a twitter hashtag to normally accomplish in the real world though XD.

It's actually about what I would expect in the 21st century if you can get a couple thousand whiny, insecure shitposters to direct their anger at a handful of targets they've wanted to attack for years.

Still, fact remains that Gamergate's influence was nowhere near what they claimed it to be, and the insistence of the diehards that they're still relevant and a force to be reckoned with is almost tragic in how you see human beings pissing their lives away to satisfy petty grudges based largely on imagined sleights.

Define pissing their lives away. I was pretty active in the heyday of GG and still managed to write my book and work at my job as well as do things NOT related to GG. Including actually playing good vidya.

Metalix Knightmare:
Snip

Was more referring to that face groping bollocks. Also the drugging, and no I don't care what the context is, becoming romantically involved with someone because of drugs will always be effing creepy. And I seem to recall the endings being removed from BD 2 being arbitrary bad endings that happened because of hidden background mechanics that no one told you about and were rather hated in Japan, because it forced people to have to replay the game in order to get all the stuff, so it comes across to me like the devs were removing a mechanic that no one liked and people were made about it mainly for purist reasons, as opposed to the merits of getting a bad ending for no good reason.

erttheking:

Fischgopf:

erttheking:

Not really. Plenty of people still do. We're still having the same old arguments. The anti SJW crowd are just the ones raising a stink now.

Examples?

But why wouldn't we be having the same arguments? The arguments aren't the problem, it's how they are conducted, the weird us vs them mentality so many people were putting on display. I don't want to speak for everyone, but I know that plenty of people stopped taking part because they got the feeling that you aren't allowed to have nuanced opinions on things without getting dogpiled. That obviously hasn't entirely stopped, Assholes are gonna Asshole, but I do think it's gotten better...with the possible exception of all the insanity surrounding the Election and the aftermath...in that case...Americans gonna American xD

And if the Anti-SJW are raising a stink, either I haven't noticed or you and I have different ideas of what a Anti-SJW is. And if they were, I'd consider it a good thing. I don't consider SJWs to be good people, but bad people perverting good causes for personal gratification...but then again, I doubt we are on the same page on what exactly a SJW even is.

Examples of what exactly?

TBH I feel like GG only made that worse. I feel like we've only gotten civility back up pre GG levels, which weren't impressive.

Bad term, but I basically see people flipping out very easily and making big deals out of minor things. Fire Emblem Fates, Yooka Laylee, Overwatch (Tracer's ass and the addition of Zayria) Street Fighter, Bravely Default 2, it takes little to get them going.

Of ideas purged and people ostracized (also, not gonna lie, kind of creepy terms to use)

Uh, I can't say that these Forums here were ever very civil and I've been around here since early 2009. This place has always been a fest of passive agressive insults and circle jerks. It's what the kind of rules we have here leads too. A thin veneer of civility poorly masquerading behavior that is often worse then just outright telling someone you think they are an Asshole or Stupid. Atleast I've never known it as anything else. It's not without reason that people talk shit about this site, the mods and the community elsewhere.

And of all those things you brought up, I have only ever heard of the Tracers Butt thing, which was stupid and aparently Yooka Laylee was disappointing? I dopn't know, I never cared about Banjo-Kazooie, so I didn't care about that game either. On the other Hand, I never cared about Mega Man, but I did very much see everything in the shitstorm surrounding Mighty No. 9. What I'm saying is that this stuff used to have far more presence...and if I may, perhaps you don't see it that way because you're a outrage jockey yourself? I don't know, all I know is that I don't seek this stuff out and never did and now I see waaaaaaaay less of it.

Regarding you asking for examples. Well, honestly, what kind of weirdo do you think I am xD I don't have some kind of shitlist of people I didn't like that goit banned or left. Off the top of my Head I could say MovieBob. That guy was always a walking talking Gamer stereotype, one that I imagined couldn't actually exist as a singular person, not to mention the complexes he has, good for the community that he was told to get bent. Bad that his content was never replaceed though. But this Site has also seemingly always had issues with that too.

Fischgopf:
Snip

I've been around awhile too, and while there were always issues, I feel like things got worse with GG, mainly because now there were clearly drawn lines.

More like JonTron's ten second cameo was taken out because he said some really racist things and everyone freaked out about it because "censorship." Even though his ideas weren't being censored because his ideas weren't in the game, but people didn't seem to appreciate that. Not really, I pretty much got all my gaming news from this website right here and the Jimquisition. I've only recently started to evacuate to Space Battles.

I suppose he is a bit of a stereotype, it's just that your wording threw me off. His ideas weren't really purged so much as people just left him behind and moved on. An approach I wish we could take more often when it comes to people we don't like.

erttheking:

Metalix Knightmare:
Snip

Was more referring to that face groping bollocks. Also the drugging, and no I don't care what the context is, becoming romantically involved with someone because of drugs will always be effing creepy. And I seem to recall the endings being removed from BD 2 being arbitrary bad endings that happened because of hidden background mechanics that no one told you about and were rather hated in Japan, because it forced people to have to replay the game in order to get all the stuff, so it comes across to me like the devs were removing a mechanic that no one liked and people were made about it mainly for purist reasons, as opposed to the merits of getting a bad ending for no good reason.

That "face groping bollocks" was the mechanic I was talking about, and it's a mechanic that quite frankly would've made Conquest a LOT less aggravating to work with. (You can't grind in that game without DLC. You have to plan ahead like Light freaking Yagami to get the people you want to S rank.)

Also, the drugs didn't make her romantically involved with anyone, it just made it easier for her to work with men. You also ignored Pickle man, Slappy face, the character from the potion thing basically being freindzoned with a big chunk of her romantic options (all while completely eliminating any other options they could've had), and so many other things that basically makes me think they got their translators from Tumblr.

http://imgur.com/gallery/X2w49

As for BD 2, gonna need a source on that one. Particularly given who was localizing it, and the other changes they made.

Metalix Knightmare:
Snip

Uh, as someone who played Conquest, it's still there. The mechanics that allow you to increase your relationship with other people. You just can't actually touch there faces.

Is that supposed to be less creepy? It had a hand in her falling in love with a guy and I find that to be creepy. And Metalix? I really do not give a crap about the overall quality of the translation. I'm talking about people freaking out over things that are related to ess jay double-us, and I struggle to see how every last translation issue can be pinned on them. I clarified what I was talking about in the last post, so let's stay on topic.

Can't exactly find a statement on it, as Nintendo seems to have been keeping the full context of it in the dark as there was no way to talk about the full context without giving away spoilers of Bravely Defaults time travel loop bullshit. But here's what they did say, and it does go into detail about how it was in response to negative reaction from Japanese gamers.

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2016/03/nintendo_issues_statement_on_side_quest_changes_in_bravely_second

Metalix Knightmare:
Define pissing their lives away. I was pretty active in the heyday of GG and still managed to write my book and work at my job as well as do things NOT related to GG. Including actually playing good vidya.

Good for you. Were there any other anecdotes about yourself you'd like to share, or was it just the one?

erttheking:

Fischgopf:
Snip

I've been around awhile too, and while there were always issues, I feel like things got worse with GG, mainly because now there were clearly drawn lines.

Disagree...kinda. For me GG was basically like a time bomb. The moment I saw how the community at large reacted to all the shenanigans surroundsing Anita's Kickstarter it was obvious to me that said bomb was there and would eventually go off. I consider the lines to have truely been made there and that was a considerable amount of time before GamerGate actually happened.

And yeah, we aren't that far off from how things were in that timespan, I do however feel that things have still calmed down.

But like I said, it's fine that this is generally happening. At least from my perspective, the problem has never been having a dialouge, it's always been those that wish to dismiss others out of hand or simply bludgeon everyone else with their personal politics. All of these issues are contentious for a reason and I just hope that we can actually get to a point where we can have nuanced discussions.

More like JonTron's ten second cameo was taken out because he said some really racist things and everyone freaked out about it because "censorship." Even though his ideas weren't being censored because his ideas weren't in the game, but people didn't seem to appreciate that.

Now that you bring it up, I do recall something about that. Specifically that I didn't care because I don't really care for JonTron, I don't like his style of humor. But, given what you said about cewnsorship,m gotta say, I don't think they should remove so0mething like that either. Essentiaslly because those things have nothing to do with each other, it shouldn't be a issue in the first place. I get why they did it, but they shouldn't have to feel compelled to do so.

I also don't think that games should be altered to appeal to the sensibilities of people that are making a stink out of sheer principle. I don't care about anime titty games either, but I don't see why some people want to ruin the fun of those that do like it. It's not like anyone has to play them or something. That's the kind of emotional immaturity I'd expect of a small child that hasn't yet grasped that the world doesn't revolve around them. Not to say that people that act like great crusaders willing to put their lives in the name of free speech...over anime titties are somehow ok, they are equally childish. But then again, so is the person constantly chiming in that it's technically not censorship because the government isn't doing it...essentially admitting that it is censorship in spirit...just not by technicality. xD

Basically, a shit ton of Gamers lost their damned minds...some of them were too far gone and mostly moved to different pastures. But for the most part, I think people in the community have calmed down.

Not really, I pretty much got all my gaming news from this website right here and the Jimquisition. I've only recently started to evacuate to Space Battles.

Well, there you go. Jim tends to cover juicy juicy clickbait, so I'm not surprised you've heard about this stuff.

I suppose he is a bit of a stereotype, it's just that your wording threw me off. His ideas weren't really purged so much as people just left him behind and moved on. An approach I wish we could take more often when it comes to people we don't like.

Yeah, sometimes I word things weirdly, I post a lot at night and end up writing in a stream of thought type of way because I'm tired and don't want to make too much of an effort. Pretty much the only time I even really get to post with my work life lately.

And don't get me wrong about MovieBob, I liked a lot of his content, I was even able to overlook a lot of the cheese in his GameOverthinker series. But Bob is way better as someone who just talks about obscure pop culture trivia, he is terrible when he starts sharing his personal opinions. I mean, if you watched his content on screw attack or his Magneto was right Video, it becomes pretty clear that he hasn't gotten over bullying in school after over a decade and projects his feelings over that onto people that for instance like military shooters. And from what I've heard, his Book actually makes him look even worse.

I actually feel kinda bad for him that he ended up getting pulled into all of it.

Fischgopf:
Now that you bring it up, I do recall something about that. Specifically that I didn't care because I don't really care for JonTron, I don't like his style of humor. But, given what you said about cewnsorship,m gotta say, I don't think they should remove so0mething like that either. Essentiaslly because those things have nothing to do with each other, it shouldn't be a issue in the first place. I get why they did it, but they shouldn't have to feel compelled to do so.

What do you mean by compelled?

I mean, they could have replaced all the cutscenes with videos of colonoscopies if they wanted, or designed a special controller intended to be inserted into your butt and make it so the game doesn't work without it.. nothing was stopping them from doing that so they were "free" to do it if they wanted to. It would have been a terrible idea though, so they didn't.

Also, like.. how far would you take this.. if JonTron had been caught sexually abusing kids, for example, should they be compelled to leave his sections in game because the two things have nothing to do with each other?

Okay, so, joking aside. Those things actually do have something to do with each other. There's a reason why people get offered cameo roles in games. I've never been offered one, for example, and most people haven't. Basically, it's a form of cross promotion. These kinds of cameos happen because the game's marketing benefits from having someone with a preexisting fanbase (an "influencer", in today's horrible marketing language) attached to it. Similarly, the influencer gets some promotion for themselves, gets to raise their profile and possibly earn a little money. It's a mutually beneficial arrangement.

However, it's also dependent on both sides being able to bring something to the table. For the influencer, that's their existing media profile and their reputation. If they ruin that reputation or become famous for the wrong reasons, then that controversy influences their impact on the games marketing. There's no compulsion about this, noone is holding a gun to anyone's head, it's just how marketing works. It's a bad idea to use someone famous to promote your game if part of why they're famous is for being a racist. That reputation is the entire reason they are there in the first place.

Sure, you can say it's bad to use people as props to make money.. but that's capitalism. Games exist to make money.

erttheking:

I've been around awhile too, and while there were always issues, I feel like things got worse with GG, mainly because now there were clearly drawn lines.

I'd imagine so, so we should always remember who drew those clear lines.

Hint: it was the "game journos". But plenty of people were eager to adopt their hysterical "there is no neutrality when it comes to evil misogynerds!" ostracism strategy, just to be on that sweet "Right Side of History". There are always people who wish to "elevate" themselves by savaging cartoonish caricatures of their peers.

StatusNil:

erttheking:

I've been around awhile too, and while there were always issues, I feel like things got worse with GG, mainly because now there were clearly drawn lines.

I'd imagine so, so we should always remember who drew those clear lines.

Hint: it was the "game journos". But plenty of people were eager to adopt their hysterical "there is no neutrality when it comes to evil misogynerds!" ostracism strategy, just to be on that sweet "Right Side of History". There are always people who wish to "elevate" themselves by savaging cartoonish caricatures of their peers.

Ok let me stop you right there. I tried to stay neutral in this entire shit storm, I really did, but apparently that offended GG to such a degree you'd think I was calling them a bad word for Jews on a regular basis. I didn't get pushed out of neutrality by anti GGers. I got pushed out by GGers. Don't give me that "my shit don't stink" attitude. They were the ones arrogantly saying "if you're not pro GG you're anti consumer." Fuck that noise.

StatusNil:

I'd imagine so, so we should always remember who drew those clear lines.

Hint: it was the "game journos". But plenty of people were eager to adopt their hysterical "there is no neutrality when it comes to evil misogynerds!" ostracism strategy, just to be on that sweet "Right Side of History". There are always people who wish to "elevate" themselves by savaging cartoonish caricatures of their peers.

It never was the "game jouros" that were to blame for anything though. I've been playing games all my life as have most of my IRL friends and none of us ever have frequented the publications of any of the people mentioned on the gamergate shitlist. This narrative that it was the eeevvviiill gamejournos and MSM that turned the public against GG is utter horseshit.

It was the misogynerds that did that themselves. Everyone who even plays a little online has been watching their hateful shit since online video-games were ever a thing and nobody besides their little clique ever thought that gaming was in the grip of this pro-feminist cabal of shoddy journalism.

Truth is that the harassment of the "Literally Who's" was the only newsworthy aspect of the story. (and still is)

erttheking:

StatusNil:

erttheking:

I've been around awhile too, and while there were always issues, I feel like things got worse with GG, mainly because now there were clearly drawn lines.

I'd imagine so, so we should always remember who drew those clear lines.

Hint: it was the "game journos". But plenty of people were eager to adopt their hysterical "there is no neutrality when it comes to evil misogynerds!" ostracism strategy, just to be on that sweet "Right Side of History". There are always people who wish to "elevate" themselves by savaging cartoonish caricatures of their peers.

Ok let me stop you right there. I tried to stay neutral in this entire shit storm, I really did, but apparently that offended GG to such a degree you'd think I was calling them a bad word for Jews on a regular basis. I didn't get pushed out of neutrality by anti GGers. I got pushed out by GGers. Don't give me that "my shit don't stink" attitude. They were the ones arrogantly saying "if you're not pro GG you're anti consumer." Fuck that noise.

Hey, me too!

Apparently because I took what I thought to be the reasonable stance of not immediately wanting to witch-hunt a woman and instead wait for more information to come out, that made me a "white knight SJW" who was "pro censorship" and all sorts of other nonsense.

In fact, I had a lot of sympathies for the stated goal of the thing at the beginning. I'd love for journalism to be held to a higher standard; there's little that makes me roll my eyes faster than seeing sensationalist tabloid nonsense, be it from the internet or actual magazines. 'Course, that's also why I couldn't end up supporting them. From the very beginning, gators were all about sensationalist crap, as long as it supported them.

shrekfan246:

erttheking:

StatusNil:

I'd imagine so, so we should always remember who drew those clear lines.

Hint: it was the "game journos". But plenty of people were eager to adopt their hysterical "there is no neutrality when it comes to evil misogynerds!" ostracism strategy, just to be on that sweet "Right Side of History". There are always people who wish to "elevate" themselves by savaging cartoonish caricatures of their peers.

Ok let me stop you right there. I tried to stay neutral in this entire shit storm, I really did, but apparently that offended GG to such a degree you'd think I was calling them a bad word for Jews on a regular basis. I didn't get pushed out of neutrality by anti GGers. I got pushed out by GGers. Don't give me that "my shit don't stink" attitude. They were the ones arrogantly saying "if you're not pro GG you're anti consumer." Fuck that noise.

Hey, me too!

Apparently because I took what I thought to be the reasonable stance of not immediately wanting to witch-hunt a woman and instead wait for more information to come out, that made me a "white knight SJW" who was "pro censorship" and all sorts of other nonsense.

In fact, I had a lot of sympathies for the stated goal of the thing at the beginning. I'd love for journalism to be held to a higher standard; there's little that makes me roll my eyes faster than seeing sensationalist tabloid nonsense, be it from the internet or actual magazines. 'Course, that's also why I couldn't end up supporting them. From the very beginning, gators were all about sensationalist crap, as long as it supported them.

When their stance is you are either with us or against us, that is what they should expect to happen. Hell even pointing out who was on their actual boycott list linked on the OP of their megathread was apparently a reason for them to flip out on you because they were not even aware of who they were boycotting..

evilthecat:

Fischgopf:
Now that you bring it up, I do recall something about that. Specifically that I didn't care because I don't really care for JonTron, I don't like his style of humor. But, given what you said about cewnsorship,m gotta say, I don't think they should remove so0mething like that either. Essentiaslly because those things have nothing to do with each other, it shouldn't be a issue in the first place. I get why they did it, but they shouldn't have to feel compelled to do so.

What do you mean by compelled?

That they don't really have any real choice in the matter. That's bad.

I don't want them to feel forced to make any particular choice because of third parties over something done by yet another third party.

And no, I wouldn't consider it any different if JonTron had done something even worse. Why would that change my underlying principle?

It simply stops being about JonTron (or whoever) if you are basically attacking someone else over something they had no control over. It's just petty vindictiveness, go after JonTron for all I care, not other people with hardly any relation and certainly no meaningful control over him.

And that's not even to say that they should have kept it in. I just wish they could honestly decide for themselves how to respond without outside pressure.

Fischgopf:
It simply stops being about JonTron (or whoever) if you are basically attacking someone else over something they had no control over. It's just petty vindictiveness, go after JonTron for all I care, not other people with hardly any relation and certainly no meaningful control over him.

1) Noone "went after" anyone. The company made an independent decision. Even if people had "gone after" them, though, that's really not a problem. Consumers are allowed to have an opinion on a product which is available for commercial release, that's an integral part of free expression. They're allowed to have an opinion on any aspect of that product. No offices were firebombed, no guns were held to heads, no crimes were committed. Do you think people shouldn't be allowed to express critical opinions within the confines of the law?

2) Playtonic had complete control over their professional relationship with JonTron. They excercised this control by terminating that relationship freely and of their own volition "after becoming aware of comments" made by him. They didn't do this because they were forced, or because anyone was blaming them for the comments he made on his personal twitch channel or something, they did it because the relationship was no longer beneficial to them.

Game companies are not the scrawny kid in the playground getting "bullied" by the big, scary Sejuws, they're corporations composed of professionals who are working, ultimately, towards the bottom line of making fat stacks (and the stacks are pretty fat here, in Playtonic Games' case they're definitely into the millions of dollars). If companies make a decision, it's almost always because they see a financial stake in that decision. Literally the only question anyone cares about is "will this make us more money or not". Intangible things like "artistic integrity" or "diverse representation" only matter in the context of marketing and as a way to drive consumer attitudes to a product so that more people will buy it. That's what they care about, and that's why it's simultaneously always a choice (because nothing anyone else does or says actually makes a difference to a company whose only interest is to make money) and never a choice (because the correct course of action is always predetermined by the bottom line). It largely depends how you define "choice".

evilthecat:

Fischgopf:
It simply stops being about JonTron (or whoever) if you are basically attacking someone else over something they had no control over. It's just petty vindictiveness, go after JonTron for all I care, not other people with hardly any relation and certainly no meaningful control over him.

1) Noone "went after" anyone. The company made an independent decision. Even if people had "gone after" them, though, that's really not a problem. Consumers are allowed to have an opinion on a product which is available for commercial release, that's an integral part of free expression. They're allowed to have an opinion on any aspect of that product. No offices were firebombed, no guns were held to heads, no crimes were committed. Do you think people shouldn't be allowed to express critical opinions within the confines of the law?

2) Playtonic had complete control over their professional relationship with JonTron. They excercised this control by terminating that relationship freely and of their own volition "after becoming aware of comments" made by him. They didn't do this because they were forced, or because anyone was blaming them for the comments he made on his personal twitch channel or something, they did it because the relationship was no longer beneficial to them.

Game companies are not the scrawny kid in the playground getting "bullied" by the big, scary Sejuws, they're corporations composed of professionals who are working, ultimately, towards the bottom line of making fat stacks (and the stacks are pretty fat here, in Playtonic Games' case they're definitely into the millions of dollars). If companies make a decision, it's almost always because they see a financial stake in that decision. Literally the only question anyone cares about is "will this make us more money or not". Intangible things like "artistic integrity" or "diverse representation" only matter in the context of marketing and as a way to drive consumer attitudes to a product so that more people will buy it. That's what they care about, and that's why it's simultaneously always a choice (because nothing anyone else does or says actually makes a difference to a company whose only interest is to make money) and never a choice (because the correct course of action is always predetermined by the bottom line). It largely depends how you define "choice".

You two better don't forget that Yooka-Laylee was a kickstarter project. Although the backers had no legal power over Playtonic's decisions, it wouldn't be farfetched for the later to hear the backers' requests and choose to follow them as a sign of good faith (that's assuming Playtonic's original decision was to let the voice untouched).

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here