PK htiw klaw eriF

I have to agree with all of this. I wonder what any ethics policy should look like? IMO it should at least include disclaimers about ties to the subject matter. Perhaps separating opinion pieces and actual news would be good as well.

I suppose one could argue that even if Mr. Grayson did not favorably write about his paramour's game, he could be influencing how others at the publication he writes for review the game in question. Could be considered a bit of a stretch, but it isn't something that is particularly hard to address. This all goes back to that stuff TN posted a while back, if gaming journalists adopted a standard of ethics and adhered to them they've taken away the raison d'être GamerGate has for existing. Refusal to do so is just going to cause GG to grow and grow, as it looks increasingly like they don't want to address any concerns of corruption and have descended into mud-flinging instead.

This article makes some good point from an outsiders perspective. I also laughed at the comment below "Yet here we are: Apparently, it needs to be said. GamerGate also underlines one very sad aspect of the gaming scene. The stereotype of a "gamer" is a lonely young man who has replaced his social life with a set of animated avatars on a screen, and now has difficulty relating to women: The angry male virgin nerd, in other words. Let's assume this stereotype is grossly unfair. Gaming is bigger than that. But if you wanted to convince the outside world that gaming is dominated by angry male virgin nerds, then these tone-deaf responses to critics of gaming, and the death threats that have come along with them, are a pretty good way of doing it." The way this whole thing is going on and on and some of the reasons for some of the outrage does make this quote relevant to some gamers, or at least that's how they come across Let's put the shoe on the other foot and say that Yet here we are: Apparently, it needs to be said. Anti GamerGate also underlines one very sad aspect of the feminist scene. The stereotype of a feminist is a manhating selfobsessed lying greedy bitch or an **** trying to abuse labels and his media access to manipulate the general public into supporting his probably corrupt actions: The feminazi or the corrupt politician/journalist/randomguylookingtoexploitpeople, in other words. Let's assume this stereotype is grossly unfair. feminism is bigger than that. But if you wanted to convince the outside world that feminism is dominated by feminazis and corrupt journalists trying to get people to look the other way, then these tone-deaf responses to GamerGate, and the death threats that have come along with them, are a pretty good way of doing it. All you need to do is switch one label from another to make something telling everyone to stop voicing their disapproval because someone went to far apply to one side of an argument instead of the other, think about how easily the core message of a statement applies to what you support (feminism up there could just as easily be replaced with sjwing as well) before telling everyone how great the statement is. If there is a moral high ground, it's on the gamergate side anyhow, simply because it's less organized, and the people who are harrassing people on our side of the fence are actively being condemned by the closests they have to spokesmen, whereas harrassment is generally being condoned, supported, claimed to be falseflags, or at best, ignored, by the media spokesmen of the media/sjw coalition. Sure you can easily reverse words in that quote if you want, but it wouldn't really be relevant because that's not the point the author is making But using the logic of the author, it is a point that can be made. Throwing stones in glass houses and all that. http://gamergate.giz.moe/2014/09/random-gamergate-supporters-being-doxxed-and-harassed-in-real-life-at-least-one-lost-their-job/ And if you don't consider Twitter posts from people being harassed as valid, keep in mind that is the only proof publicly presented so far in Wu's case.

This article makes some good point from an outsiders perspective. I also laughed at the comment below "Yet here we are: Apparently, it needs to be said. GamerGate also underlines one very sad aspect of the gaming scene. The stereotype of a "gamer" is a lonely young man who has replaced his social life with a set of animated avatars on a screen, and now has difficulty relating to women: The angry male virgin nerd, in other words. Let's assume this stereotype is grossly unfair. Gaming is bigger than that. But if you wanted to convince the outside world that gaming is dominated by angry male virgin nerds, then these tone-deaf responses to critics of gaming, and the death threats that have come along with them, are a pretty good way of doing it." The way this whole thing is going on and on and some of the reasons for some of the outrage does make this quote relevant to some gamers, or at least that's how they come across Let's put the shoe on the other foot and say that Yet here we are: Apparently, it needs to be said. Anti GamerGate also underlines one very sad aspect of the feminist scene. The stereotype of a feminist is a manhating selfobsessed lying greedy bitch or an **** trying to abuse labels and his media access to manipulate the general public into supporting his probably corrupt actions: The feminazi or the corrupt politician/journalist/randomguylookingtoexploitpeople, in other words. Let's assume this stereotype is grossly unfair. feminism is bigger than that. But if you wanted to convince the outside world that feminism is dominated by feminazis and corrupt journalists trying to get people to look the other way, then these tone-deaf responses to GamerGate, and the death threats that have come along with them, are a pretty good way of doing it. All you need to do is switch one label from another to make something telling everyone to stop voicing their disapproval because someone went to far apply to one side of an argument instead of the other, think about how easily the core message of a statement applies to what you support (feminism up there could just as easily be replaced with sjwing as well) before telling everyone how great the statement is. If there is a moral high ground, it's on the gamergate side anyhow, simply because it's less organized, and the people who are harrassing people on our side of the fence are actively being condemned by the closests they have to spokesmen, whereas harrassment is generally being condoned, supported, claimed to be falseflags, or at best, ignored, by the media spokesmen of the media/sjw coalition. I lol'd at that. Well done. I see 8chan and anonymous responses to questionnaires is now reliable evidence. I'm sure by making such accusations with such reasoning is going to be very effective.

Another night lying awake wishing I could get some damn sleep but being unable to.

It's an attempt by SJWs to shame people based on race, sex, or orientation. It doesn't take into account sociology-economic situation, religious affiliation, or any number of other factors that can be detrimental to one's situation in life.

Apparently not. This doxxing stuff has to stop, releasing someone's private information over the internet is morally despicable at best. You won't ever be able to stop anon trolls who have their minds set on causing havoc, but that does not excuse **** like this. Quite a lot. I would say they're deeply bitter and rather than wanting a focus on improving the situation or to promote actual equality and opportunity, they find it easier to attack a group they perceive to be privileged and demand special privlidges for their groups of choice.

Not really, his articles of outrage always had that hint of one to me and that locks it up for me. Oh well, maybe he will resign from the Escapist out of principle. Heh. SJWs don't have principles when it comes to their money.

I quite like the idea of being a "dead virgin". No taxes and if a girl tells me she is pregnant, I now have two reasons why I'm not daddy. Thanks SJWs.

Looks to be a pale imitation of Hellblazer.

Who, in this thread, is arguing there should be less women playing games or in video games? Nobody. I don't give a crap if women are in games or play them. Doesn't bother me one bit. Don't make stuff up. Nobody is arguing this point. However, there is no 'need' for more women either? Or less. Or more or less men. It should be pointed out, btw, that most of the men in video games are treated nothing more than mere monsters to defeat. Very few games have you mass killing women. I can thinkf only a handful that do that but I can think of many who let you kill men by the hundreds if not thousands. but, people like Anita and Bruce whine about the one female killed. L0L \Because, as know, in this 'man's world' men are nothing but fodder meant to be tossed in the meat grinder while women are too fragile and broken who need to be locked up in the house because all the fodder will rape them. LMAO Why do 'SJWs' hate both men and women? That's evil, sick, and twisted. Hot damn, Volo used the quote function!

Anita is being at least somewhat moderate (at least she keeps her mouth closed) but I bet this guy puts into plain words what she really thinks. Way to sound reasonable while backhandedly making a personal attack. Less passive aggressive than her videos at any rate. That woman has a lump of coal for a heart. Lump of coal eh? I think we know the real reason she hates that Santa Claus song, her dad gave her coal one Christmas and she's held a grudge ever since.

... ...that is some bulls***... I know, we should invade those maple loving sons of bitches and make them celebrate real Thanksgiving.

You'll get off your arse and, just like that, make a game which realistically would take millions of dollars and many months to make even for an existing developer/publisher who already has all the necessary human capital and infrastructure? And you'll do this by yourself, in your spare time on a weekend? Come on now, I know there is lots to be criticised about Sarkeesian's videos (from the pre-determined conclusions, cherry-picking, and general intellectual dishonesty, to the offensiveness of her - and other feminists culture warrior's - underlying presumption that society can and should be made a better place by policing & censoring media content that men like to consume). But lamenting that game developers/publishers don't make games sufficiently to one's liking, isn't in and of itself objectionable. Gamers do that too, like, all the time. In fact it's probably the main raison d'être of many gaming related online communities. Making your dream game yourself, simply isn't realistic unless you've chosen that career path. If folks like Anita want to see games that mesh with their worldview made, organizing a small dev team and doing a kickatarter isn't as much of a hurdle as getting the funding for a AAA size game. Recording poorly researched preach sessions that (falsely) illustrate how hostile games are to women sates the internet activists, but does **** all at providing a solution to the problems they have with games.

I must say that Anita's public views are quite moderate Her views paraphrased by me "I want developer's use less tropes, especially those I see to be degrading towards women" "I want developer's to use more active female protagonists" "I want more games that don't focus so much on violence" "I think using tropes that I think to be sexist and not giving women as many active roles as men shows that our society is still leans towards patriarchy" "I want/hope that game developers start to make more games for my tastes" Her vision for what direction games as medium and art form should develop don't wholly correspond with my vision, but I don't think that her vision is anyway radical. The issue comes about in two seperate ways: 1) Anita CAN be radical. Find a video she did on sexist Christmas songs. Have fun with it. 2) Anita lies. Check how she misrepresents Fallout New Vegas (and others) in her women as backround decoration video. Those two combined, you actually start to wonder if there aren't ulterior motives, moreso with the second one than the first. Either she's soooo radical she pulls ridiculous claims out of thin air here and there (unlikely, as other times she IS quite reasonable), or the girl honestly is just trying to profit off of this situation she's found herself in, leading to profit > truth and thus she'll do misleading or half-assed pieces to gain profit. I'm replaying New Vegas right now and do not feel encouraged to gun down random women. I think if someone feels New Vegas encourages you to do that, it says more about them than about the game.

Neither. Thrown, bladed, brawling, or blunt. Why? No ammunition.* *note: thrown weapons have ammunition, but you could pick up almost anything to throw, making ammo almost unlimited. I'd go explosives. Extremely limited, but extremely effective. Stockpiling explosives, or learning to make them, can get you into serious trouble. If it's legal trouble, I doubt I'll have to worry about that after the apocalypse. Besides, I'd rather have plenty of grenades with me if we get mutated animals or robots.

So I'm about to purchase this. Should I play it now or wait until patches are released?

Neither. Thrown, bladed, brawling, or blunt. Why? No ammunition.* *note: thrown weapons have ammunition, but you could pick up almost anything to throw, making ammo almost unlimited. I'd go explosives. Extremely limited, but extremely effective.

In the advent of an apocalypse, energy weapons or guns?

Has there been any m+kb gameplay footage yet?

I'm impressed how intelligent and mature these SJWs are.

That is pretty much every Sunday for me. Liquor stores are closed then as well.

... The double standards these people have require a level of doublethink I didn't believe was possible.

Then respond to TN's points, instead of doing drive-by finger-wagging. Here they are: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68931-drama-in-indy-gaming-and-games-journalism/page-7?do=findComment&comment=1522053

You made excellent points on why that Verge article isn't valid. I didn't have the strength for that and instead lashed out. I'm sorry. But do think Bruce will reply to your points? No. He will simply go silent for few pages and then come back when the next "gamers are dead" article is posted: "Oh, look! All those valid points this article is making." *Smiley face* kirottu must have a crystal ball.