Drama in the indy gaming biz ?

[BruceVC]

 

You won't come right with people on these forums who criticize the stance gaming journalists have taken around Zoe Quinn. They refuse to see reason or use logic.

To be fair, Bruce, this isn't a mathematical formula; people can see the same things and draw vastly different conclusions because we are, ultimately, vastly different cognitive entities who will draw on vastly different life experiences to analyze situations and data.

 

Most people are debating from a perspective of outrage because of the usage of the word "gamers". Despite the fact the word doesn't apply to all gamers

Really? Perhaps you'd like to take it up with Merriam-Webster -

1: a player who is game; especially : an athlete who relishes competition

2: a person who plays games; especially : a person who regularly plays computer or video games

 

Maybe the OED?

A person who plays a game or games, typically a participant in a computer or role-playing game.

 

they chose to ignore this and take it as a personal insult. I have tried and people just want to believe what they want, irrespective of the explanations given

How can you explain that a word doesn't mean its definition, per the dictionary, but instead means the arbitrarily constructed label that is now being used?

 

I understand the living language changes, but that change is by common usage, not forced usage.

 

But good luck getting people to see the facts

Don't worry, we'll keep trying to get you to see the truth, Bruce. We have faith in you.

 

 

I want to ask you two questions Amentep and anyone else is also  welcome to answer

 

• When I started the feminist thread I used two English  dictionary definitions of the word Feminism to explain what the word actually meant. I did this because several members on these forums kept saying the word meant "  a hatred of men "," advancement of women at the expense of men", " a world where men had no place and were redundant " and other similar false definitions. But despite what the dictionary said I was told  repeatedly by several members that the definition nowadays  has a connotation and it " doesn't matter what the dictionary says because that's not what the word means". I don't remember you or Nonek jumping into that discussion and making the point that the dictionary definition should always be relevant. I believe Nonek actually disagreed with me around  what the word means nowadays. In fact at the end of that discussion I actually agreed the dictionary definition wasn't accurate anymore around feminism and decided to say I cared about gender equality going forward.

So which is it? Do we believe dictionary definitions or do we accept that certain words in a certain context don't mean the literal meaning in the dictionary?.

 

 

• I have often mentioned on these forums I get my game reviews from several sources that include websites like Gamespot, Eurogamer and RPS. The response was almost universally comments like " heh, you think gaming journalists have any integrity" or " you can't trust any gaming website for accurate reviews". So most of the people on this thread had very little respect for gaming journalists from 2 years ago. But yet now we hear comments like " gaming journalists have betrayed our trust", and " gaming journalists have comprised there integrity ", and " gaming journalists have sold out there fans". But most people thought this about them anyway. So why all this outrage now? Surly it shouldn't feel like a such a crusade against gamers if you didn't value there opinion anyway. So where is this anger and disappointment  really coming from?

I look forward to the responses that follow

[Longknife]

 

 

 

I just got here and there's like five pages to read through from when I last checked this thread. Mind explaining or showing how all the claims are false?

If you only focus on my posts it's just five or six of them.

I don't know which claims are being made in total. I've asked for examples and there were two articles about friends' games that were neither reviews nor glowing praises. The rest of the claims were mainly that - claims without backup or conspiracy theories, all without proof (or proof to the contrary).

I just did and I don't see any answers. In fact you don't seem to be addressing any rumors or debunking any, you're chatting about tangets or other ideas. :U

There's nothing to debunk. That's the thing. People talk about the corruption as if it was a known fact. They don't actually offer any evidence that holds up. (Meshugger posted something about DARPA, but nobody knows what his point is.)

Also I distinctly remember my posts being awesome. Don't talk about them like that.

The entire issue is very simple. It IS getting blown out or proportion up yes, but it is still an issue.

 

 

In a nutshell:

 

-idiots exist on the Internet who respond to killing enemy players in a game by saying "hurhur u suk u filthy casual **** I bet ur gey and u like phallic object ps hurhur hur."

 

-Anita and Co., having skin about as thick as a ****ing half-sheet of toilet paper, take offense to this and consider it a MASSIVE ATTACK on their ability to pursue life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, instead of saying "oh it's just another tard on the Internet, guess I should ignore him" like any normal human being with half a brain does.

 

-Anita and Co. then begin a MIGHTY CRUSADE to rid the gaming world of all evils and save the prince (because saving a princess would be TOTALLY SEXIST) and all of them pursue some form of position within the gaming industry, whether it be as a developer, reviewer, journalists or judge/critic.

 

-Probably unintentionally, the very group that all went on their MIGHTY CRUSADE to save the prince all seem to do a fabulous job of giving each other positive reviews and support. I highly doubt this is all a conspiracy to make a collectivized effort to change the very structure of the gaming industry, but nevertheless it IS bad because it's undeniably bias. Prime example that I've stated before: say Anita has 7 friends that are gaming journalists. All seven are far more likely to take some idiot saying "stfu bitch imma cut u lel" super serious business and report on it as "A CLEAR SIGN OF THE END TIMES FOR ALL FEMALE GAMERS AND UNDENIABLE PROOF OF SEXISM WITHIN EACH AND EVERY INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED WITHIN THE GAMING INDUSTRY." Simply because a decent percent of the gaming journalists have covered the story, remaining game journalists feel "peer pressured" into covering the story too, believing that since so much coverage is going up, this must be what gamers are interested in and they might look unprofessional if they manage to miss this popular news story. Just like that, one small minority group has disproportionate influence given their size.

 

 

 

-The final Result? Anita and Co. are EXACTLY like the obnoxious "h4rdc0re gamurz" they loathe in that they label anyone "outside of their group" as a cancer in the industry. However, Anita and co. are far more annoying because average joes like myself who COULD NOT GIVE TWO FLYING ****S AND JUST WANT TO PLAY A GAME are now essentially being force fed a political agenda in our games and or gaming media. A rather bias one too. I can ignore some idiot calling me a filthy casual, I can't ignore a group of people insistent on gaining influence within the gaming industry to push their agenda upon me.

 

Suddenly we all have to listen to them ****ing cry about being called a bad word on the Internet and we all have to hand them tissues and we all have to cater our games with them in mind. No, **** off and go sit in your corner with your friends and leave us alone. Enjoy your games, enjoy your company, enjoy yourselves, but stop forcing this bull**** into all of us.

 

 

-This is made worse by the fact that gaming journalism has a history of bias and corruption. By no means is this a form of corruption where someone pays maya or Silverstring $2000 for a splendid game review or the like, but it's bias in the sense that there's now this weird little portion of game reviews where gender equality is apparently a RLY FKN IMPORTANT FACTOR GUIZ in deciding if the new Tetris 2014 game is a good game or not. "Yes I can stack the red block on top of the yellow one to clear some lines, but AM I SURE THE RED BLOCK ISNT SOME CHAUVINISTIC MALE SEXIST PIG PRACTICING DOMESTIC ABUSE ON HIS BATTERED WIFE???" Seriously **** off, I'm trying to play a game. This is made only worse because as we've seen, Anita for example will push and force her feminism messages WHETHER APPLICABLE OR NOT (see Fallout New Vegas), so we've basically got crazed zealots spewing a politic mantra none of us give two ****s about in a totally irrelevant industry round the clock. It's not a matter of sexism; the same response would be given if, for example, a group of people went on a GRAND CRUSADE to ensure that all games include a pro-capitalism and anti-communism mantra or some crap. We just don't want bias in the ****ing industry anymore. It's that simple.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Longknife

[Malcador]

Never did understand how you could possess ownership of a word, but I guess I need to waste time studying that to fully get it. In this situation, gamer just means someone that is into the hobby - distinction should be like that of reading. Everyone reads but not everyone "reads", as I imagine everyone knows. The "journalists" should just be clear, could have avoided all this fuss if they just referred to the demographic they meant explicitly rather than engaging in some campaign to define a word based on what they do. Interesting attitude they possess to do that.

 

Don't think they really are for games stagnating, unless you believe "social justice" issues in gaming is the only avenue to that. For the most part, see people mainly getting backs up over being lectured or preached at, fairly expected, I suppose ideally it wouldn't happen.

[Oerwinde]

I don't see why the gaming press has to hijack the term Gamer when there is already a term for vile woman-hating nerds: Neckbeard.

[Malcador]

I have often mentioned on these forums I get my game reviews from several sources that include websites like Gamespot, Eurogamer and RPS. The response was almost universally comments like " heh, you think gaming journalists have any integrity" or " you can't trust any gaming website for accurate reviews". So most of the people on this thread had very little respect for gaming journalists from 2 years ago. But yet now we hear comments like " gaming journalists have betrayed our trust", and " gaming journalists have comprised there integrity ", and " gaming journalists have sold out there fans". But most people thought this about them anyway. So why all this outrage now? Surly it shouldn't feel like a such a crusade against gamers if you didn't value there opinion anyway. So where is this anger and disappointment  really coming from?

If you're trying to point an inconsistency or hypocrisy, you're going to need to dig it up at a poster level - so find where everyone saying journalists selling out now said something bad about them back then. Else this is just a convenient fiction. Also I think people here have gotten on RPS and EG's case for their editors deciding their work must have meaning and write for The Cause.

 

Also, could have those that suspected in the past glad to have proof, be it real or otherwise and see this as a chance to ram the spear in to the "journalists".

[alanschu]

 

 

I take offense at people taking a term that SHOULD be neutral and SHOULD be inclusive of all gamers and declaring the meaning actually means a sub-group of gamers. Language means certain things, and I'm not fond of the concept of changing the meanings of words so as to label a subgroup and marginalize them, even if I don't agree with that subgroup.

 

Because when you start applying a negative label to people, it becomes a cudgel to curb disagreement.

 

"Oh you didn't like my game/article/award/list?  YOU'RE A GAMER!"

 

The term's neutrality was already negated when people claimed ownership of it and spoke out with hostility to anyone that tried to use the term in any other way than their narrowly defined application of the term.  Although...

 

 

 

 

And plenty of people are asshats online who'd never be in real life.

 

You literally excuse their usage here.  (bonus irony points: gaming journalists stating this were also online!)

 

I take offense to people who fail to recognize which group was being specifically focused on here, complete with the fallback of "people are just **** on the internet."

 

There's cause and effect here.  Gaming journalists don't call out "gamers" (quoted specifically, since I'm getting tired of writing "the subset of gamers that these articles refer to") unless "gamers" are being total asshats with respect to their hobby.

 

And those online asshats (who'd never be in real life...) do an excellent job of pushing new gamers (no quotes) away because they attack and bully those that they feel co-opt the term and ruin the purity of gaming.  Those same people who are ridiculously outspoken and go through great lengths to harass people and to try to bully/discredit them.  Anita isn't a gamer.  Game X isn't a "real" game.  Toxicity that does a good job of pushing out moderates with, I feel, the hopes that people will simply "leave gaming alone!" so that it remains what these people believe it is.

 

 

 

 

Isn't this just an outgrowth of the elitism in the industry? I've been posting online since the early 90s and the console wars, the console vs PC dichotomy has been a negative aspect of the fandom of video games for some time and IMO it is this kind of idea that perpetuates people being "well this is what gaming is all about."

BUT that doesn't mean that is what being a gamer is.  A gamer is a person who plays games and anyone who argues otherwise is WRONG.

 

And this is exactly what the articles calling out "gamers" are doing.  They're stating "you don't have ownership of the term anymore.  And the identity your group ascribes from being a gamer is being eroded."  The term gamer is being redefined, and a lot of the recent bull**** going on is providing an impetus for that.  Those that want to distance themselves from the asshats are either going to try to take more ownership of the term and increasing the voice of those gamers that aren't "gamers" (which is what I've started doing), or we'll find a new term because honestly... I don't care what specific label is applied to me for my hobby.  I am, however, sick vitriolic and hateful component of a hobby I love that gets trivially excused because "there's plenty of people [that] are asshats online.

 

Which is a privileged perspective because simply that YOU don't get harassed in person doesn't mean that people (often women) do.  "Fake geek gamer girl" and that nonsense actually does happen in person, and one of my best friends (who avidly wears game themed clothing) has to deal with it pretty much every time she wears said clothing.  Yesterday it was getting a coffee and being challenged "do you even know what that is?" (referring to the Tri Force from Zelda).  Me inquiring about it: "Yeah it pretty much always happens."  Which often comes with the typical victim blaming "well if you don't like those questions why wear stuff like that?"

 

 

This is a lot like #NotAllMen, where people are failing to realize that the silence towards **** that smear the name of gaming is the tacit acceptance of said perspectives.  It's more about "Hey I'm not a bad guy" with the failure to realize that the backlash one's receiving has a very specific cause.  Remove that cause and the outrage about "gamers" goes away.  If things fall the way I would like, it means people realize that "gamers" mean people that play games, not "**** that attack anyone and anything that threatens the purity of their gaming hobby."

[Deadly_Nightshade]

BTW I do believe her ex-boyfriend...

 

To quote something I posted earlier but never got a response to:

 

 

...has it actually been confirmed if she slept with people? If not then what’s the fuss about (besides the death threats and other BS that have spawned from the cesspool that can be the Internet)? Her ex accused her of sleeping around, sure, but it wouldn’t be the first time someone was an asshat after a break-up and I’m, honestly, slightly skeptical of his word unless there is some other evidence.

[Gfted1]

Did she deny it?

[BruceVC]

 

I have often mentioned on these forums I get my game reviews from several sources that include websites like Gamespot, Eurogamer and RPS. The response was almost universally comments like " heh, you think gaming journalists have any integrity" or " you can't trust any gaming website for accurate reviews". So most of the people on this thread had very little respect for gaming journalists from 2 years ago. But yet now we hear comments like " gaming journalists have betrayed our trust", and " gaming journalists have comprised there integrity ", and " gaming journalists have sold out there fans". But most people thought this about them anyway. So why all this outrage now? Surly it shouldn't feel like a such a crusade against gamers if you didn't value there opinion anyway. So where is this anger and disappointment  really coming from?

If you're trying to point an inconsistency or hypocrisy, you're going to need to dig it up at a poster level - so find where everyone saying journalists selling out now said something bad about them back then. Else this is just a convenient fiction. Also I think people here have gotten on RPS and EG's case for their editors deciding their work must have meaning and write for The Cause.

 

Also, could have those that suspected in the past glad to have proof, be it real or otherwise and see this as a chance to ram the spear in to the "journalists".

 

 

No Malc I'm not going back and doing all that cross-referencing, you can do it. I dare you

 

But yes I'm saying the outrage directed towards gaming journalists is exaggerated by many people

[Meshugger]

 

 

. (Meshugger posted something about DARPA, but nobody knows what his point is.)

 

Did you read the quotes that i posted? Did you look who funds and attends the project? What i make out of it is the same old academia getting funded by the government on how create a narrative for a culture that they have defined for themselves. Sure it is not the corruption of gaming press that you are looking for, but you can check the videos by the Internet Aristocrat for that matter.

[alanschu]

 

 

Never did understand how you could possess ownership of a word, but I guess I need to waste time studying that to fully get it.

 

It's seen all the time.  Often on this board too.  Often the words being used are just slightly different.  It's almost a daily occurrence on the BioWare Forums for there to be a heated discussion over the term "RPG" because to some, referring to anything that doesn't fit their strictly defined view of what an "RPG" is threatens that vision.  If RPGs are popular, but popular in the wake of something like Fallout 3 or Skyrim, then those that want more Fallout 1/2 or Baldur's Gate 2 have now become marginalized.  Devs will make RPGs not "for them" but "for those other people" instead.

 

 

I agree that those labels are fluid, but then I also respond to the disagreements I have with people that use the term in ways I find confusing in entirely different ways (it typically involves less hate than some people).

[BruceVC]

Did she deny it?

 

You never thought to ask that question did you my friend ? I bet you feel very guilty now, imagine if she didn't sleep with anyone. Imagine the bad karma you have inflicted on yourself for all the nasty things you said about her  

Edited September 3, 2014 by BruceVC

[Malcador]

Sure, I must verify a charge you make, carry on. Outrage being exaggerated, hmm...well probably true, it is the internet. Reading around, it's full of histrionics - postings about this being part of a war on women, bizarre connections of industry people and the usual flaming.

 

This is a lot like #NotAllMen, where people are failing to realize that the silence towards **** that smear the name of gaming is the tacit acceptance of said perspectives.  It's more about "Hey I'm not a bad guy" with the failure to realize that the backlash one's receiving has a very specific cause.  Remove that cause and the outrage about "gamers" goes away.  If things fall the way I would like, it means people realize that "gamers" mean people that play games, not "**** that attack anyone and anything that threatens the purity of their gaming hobby."

Hm, thinking of more serious offenses, I guess I tacitly accept homicides, heh. But really, an endless crusade against abuse online sounds like a good path to a stroke.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Malcador

[Deadly_Nightshade]

Did she deny it?

 

Not that I know of, but then I've not been following the story.

[Malcador]

 

Never did understand how you could possess ownership of a word, but I guess I need to waste time studying that to fully get it.

 

It's seen all the time.  Often on this board too.  Often the words being used are just slightly different.  It's almost a daily occurrence on the BioWare Forums for there to be a heated discussion over the term "RPG" because to some, referring to anything that doesn't fit their strictly defined view of what an "RPG" is threatens that vision.  If RPGs are popular, but popular in the wake of something like Fallout 3 or Skyrim, then those that want more Fallout 1/2 or Baldur's Gate 2 have now become marginalized.  Devs will make RPGs not "for them" but "for those other people" instead.

 

 

I agree that those labels are fluid, but then I also respond to the disagreements I have with people that use the term in ways I find confusing in entirely different ways (it typically involves less hate than some people).

 

True, labelling a static product like a game is a lot easier to discuss than labelling people though. Fair enough though.

[Gfted1]

You never thought to ask that question did you my friend ? I bet you feel very guilty now, imagine if she didn't sleep with anyone. Imagine the bad karma you have inflicted on yourself for all the nasty things you said about her  

Huh? Iirc, Ive made three posts in this thread, none of which badmouth anyone.

 

 

Not that I know of, but then I've not been following the story.

I haven't been following either but I think the silence is deafening.

[Meshugger]

 

BTW I do believe her ex-boyfriend...

 

To quote something I posted earlier but never got a response to:

 

 

...has it actually been confirmed if she slept with people? If not then what’s the fuss about (besides the death threats and other BS that have spawned from the cesspool that can be the Internet)? Her ex accused her of sleeping around, sure, but it wouldn’t be the first time someone was an asshat after a break-up and I’m, honestly, slightly skeptical of his word unless there is some other evidence.

 

 

http://thezoepost.wordpress.com/

 

Scroll down to the bottom of Act 1, there is a huuuuge facebook-chatlog where she mentions who she slept with. Zoe herself has not made a public statement who she has been with.

 

The point is not the blog by the hearthcrushed ex-boyfriend, but how she later used her connections to reddit and other friends in the industry to try silence the gossip that came along with it. Then the whole thing exploded. The easiest is to just watch these videos:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C5-51PfwI3M&list=UUWB0dvorHvkQlgfGGJR2yxQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKmy5OKg6lo&list=UUWB0dvorHvkQlgfGGJR2yxQ&index=2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Km3DZQp0StE&list=UUWB0dvorHvkQlgfGGJR2yxQ&index=1

Edited September 3, 2014 by Meshugger

[Nonek]

Because there is only one definition of gamer Bruce, and that's what they mean, the millions of us whom play games recreationally. English is the largest language in the world, there are plenty of other words to choose.

 

 

First off, the bolded.  This statement is untrue.  Both Mandarin and Spanish are spoken by more people than English.  Your perspective is, however, consistent with eurocentricism and ideology that the subset of gamers that these articles refers to.  Why do we need more black people in our games? Ugh who cares about LGBT in games? I just want to play games! God damn SJW are ruining gaming!!! As though gaming is some pure thing that should be sheltered from outside influences and untainted by those that just don't understand what it means to be a true gamer!  God forbid some article points out that older women now outnumber teenage boys.  In fact, lets make sure we point grill them on "what types of games" because if they don't fit a particular idea (which is a moving set of goalposts depending on who you ask) then we can dismiss this and speak out against articles that state this as being bogus for... reasons.

 

 

 

I question the intentions of anybody who handwaves this away and apologises for the hate speech they are now propogating against millions, if they choose to be blind towards any negative aspects of the movement they are serving as a mouthpiece for that is their priority, but to me this makes them mindless puppets parroting their masters dogma.

 

 

I question the intentions of anybody who lectures people on the proper use of words while in the immediately not following their own standards.  The same things you bitch about gaming journalism about you exempt yourself from.

 

Gaming Journalism is RIFE (click baiting, link chaining, industry sponsored award shows, etc.) with bad things and I don't, in general, care too much for it.  You're absolutely correct in your other paragraph that there's dozens upon dozens of huge issues with gaming journalism.  But when someone like Dan Golding states the following:

 

-------------

When, over the last decade, the playing of videogames moved beyond the niche, the gamer identity remained fairly uniformly stagnant and immobile. Gamer identity was simply not fluid enough to apply to a broad spectrum of people. It could not meaningfully contain, for example, Candy Crush players, Proteus players, and Call of Duty players simultaneously. When videogames changed, the gamer identity did not stretch, and so it has been broken.

-------------

 

then you're just being obstinate about the usage of the term gamers.  Don't claim to be moderate in this issue.  You dislike gaming journalism and you're insistent on this because in your views you want as much as possible against them so much so that you're splitting hairs over the usage of the term because failing to do so would mean conceding a talking point against gaming journalism.

 

For all the ills of gaming journalism, them pointing out that the term "gamer" applies to so much more people than those that are so adamantly defensive about it is hardly an indictment against it compared to other things.  But hey, like you, I have my own biases and since I've already been pretty indifferent towards the term being applied more liberally it's hardly a shock that I have less issues with them calling out the old, rigid gamer clique and illustrating that times are indeed changing.  If someone were to, however, have a particular agenda against gaming journalism it doesn't surprise me that they'd opt on being wilfully obstinate towards the nuanced use of the term in this case because hey, you have a pile of stuff you want to build up against gaming journalism and the thought of taking something off that pile isn't something you're keen on doing.  But that's not a moderate view.

 

 

If you're going to rag on gaming journalism, I'd consider your argument to have more weight if it wasn't insisting that media telling people that the ownership of the term has evolved beyond what the old school insist it is.  The subset of gamers that these articles refer to view the label as so sacred that they actively go on "hate speech" (since you used the term) campaigns to push out and discredit anyone that threatens to change the status quo.  Depression Quest isn't a game.  Anita isn't even a gamer.  Allan you don't understand the gamer identity and the co-opting of our culture capital (yes, this has been said to me, as though I haven't been a gamer for 30 years that even competed in online leagues).  The same group that shat all over Tim Schafer for "betraying" them because he simply said "I think everyone who makes games should watch this video from start to finish."  I mean, he wasn't even talking to gamers (of any kind) when he said this - he was talking to the developers.

 

But that's the issue the subset of gamers that these articles refer to. Anita is poisoning gaming through lies and all sorts of other scandalous terms. If Tim has now bought in... we have to mobilize and be even louder because otherwise true games won't be made anymore.  Especially given that Anita's video basically comes across as "Stop being lazy and use different tropes."  As though the subset of gamers that these articles refer to are actually encouraging game developers to be stagnant.

 

 

1. English is the largest language in the world, not the most used, it has the most words and is growing and thriving. The rest of your rant is pointless outrage. I am a gamer, one who plays games recreationally, there is no other definition as much as you wish there to be. Choose a different more apt term or expect the millions who play games recreationally to be upset when they are accused of things they are innocent of.

 

2. Yes I have a problem with game journalism in that it is unfit for purpose, this does not mean that I am not a moderate, it simply means that looking at the subject objectively they are not adhering to the basic codes of journalistic integrity. Once again the rest of your rant is pointless, try a little brevity next time, rather than the outraged word vomit.

 

I have actively asked for more in depth, original and innovative fresh content in games for years in the face of a steady degeneration of content, features and scope, but I am only a gamer, one who plays games recreationally, and cannot influence developers. So equating me with the group that are currently being targeted for seperation and demonisation seems rather out of place, and there is no reason to do so. I am a gamer and have no group identity, culture or axe to grind except with poor practises that serve to misinform me or poor games that are not worth their price.

 

As such a consumer I expect to be respected and not demonised along with millions of others for things I have not done. That is a reasonable aim I think. I also do not think that it is anyones right to talk down to me in a condescending manner, preach at me about their biased agenda and say that I am the problem in gaming when I simply buy games, have never once pirated and have supported a number of Kickstarters. I find such lecturing highly insultive and wonder at anyone whom takes part in it, and their arrogance to think that they have a right to do so.

 

This is my personal opinion.

[Fearabbit]

 

BTW I do believe her ex-boyfriend...

 

To quote something I posted earlier but never got a response to:

 

 

...has it actually been confirmed if she slept with people? If not then what’s the fuss about (besides the death threats and other BS that have spawned from the cesspool that can be the Internet)? Her ex accused her of sleeping around, sure, but it wouldn’t be the first time someone was an asshat after a break-up and I’m, honestly, slightly skeptical of his word unless there is some other evidence.

 

 

He has posted some videos where he shows the chatlogs. I don't know, it could be false but his story adds up quite nicely, and that's quite an amount of chatlogs, and there really was no point for him to lie.

But it isn't something that should be relevant in this discussion.

 

BTW if I have to watch these obnoxious videos where some neckbeards talk for hours about how "ironic" all these "logical fallacies" made by Anita Sarkeesian are to hear some evidence about apparent corruption in gaming journalism... well, I won't. These guys should really go back to writing blog posts if they don't just want to preach to the choir. (My feeling is however that they do want to do exactly that. The choir is big enough.)

 

@Longknife: Your point about social justice warriors and so on is a whole different discussion in my opinion. I can kind of understand that it's annoying for someone not interested in these topics - and personally I don't watch Sarkeesian's videos for the same reasons I don't watch the neckbeard videos - but at the same time I don't think this "liberal" coverage is taking anything away from games. CoD will be successful no matter how much the times are a-changing.

 

@Nonek: Well the tl;dr version of alanschu's post is basically that it wasn't gaming journalism that started misusing the term "gamer" for a small group of narrow-minded people. If anything you should be angry at the people who started dividing gamers into "true gamers" and "the Candy Crush playing rest".

Gaming journalism wasn't attacking you. I still identify as a gamer and have no problem with those articles.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Fearabbit

[Meshugger]

Please stop using the phrase "neckbeard". It is hateful, demeaning and it is triggering the senses of people that i never heard of.

[Malcador]

And it is offensive to the Amish

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Did she deny it?

No, she went into sip nce about it. It is confirmed that she did the nasty with Grayson though. Suppose the married dudes would want to keep quiet, probably not good for the marriage.

[Longknife]

@Longknife: Your point about social justice warriors and so on is a whole different discussion in my opinion. I can kind of understand that it's annoying for someone not interested in these topics - and personally I don't watch Sarkeesian's videos for the same reasons I don't watch the neckbeard videos - but at the same time I don't think this "liberal" coverage is taking anything away from games. CoD will be successful no matter how much the times are a-changing.

 

 

 

As I've stated before and I'll repeat here (briefly):

 

 

My concern is we're talking about a group involving a woman who deemed "I saw mommy kissing Santa Claus" as sexist because it "portrays all women as promiscuous cheaters."

 

I'm not for the censorship or governance of art. PERIOD. Art is about expression, no matter how sexist, racist, ignorant or simple-minded your expression may be. That Anita would name "I saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus" as sexist is practically the posterchild for why censorship or governance of art doesn't work: because those governing art are bound to misinterpet or not understand certain types of art and then art as a whole stagnates and loses diversity, which goes against EVERYTHING art is about. I'm concerned because a group of people involving this very same overzealous, idealistic, close-minded, manipulative and deceitful (yes, she does lie and yes, she does present info in misleading ways. That's not debate, that's fact) woman seem to have the clear goal of gaining influence within the industry. Yes it's par for the course as the gaming industry was already bias and corrupt for other reasons (money buying off good reviews, Doritos pope), but from an artistic perspective...? (and no I'm by NO MEANS claiming games are incredible art as a mere .5% probably qualify as "art" in my book) From an artistic perspective this group is worse. Doritos pope wasn't trying to dictate what games can and cannot do, he was simply taking Bungie's **** in his mouth in exchange for cash.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Longknife

[Nonek]

@Nonek: Well the tl;dr version of alanschu's post is basically that it wasn't gaming journalism that started misusing the term "gamer" for a small group of narrow-minded people. If anything you should be angry at the people who started dividing gamers into "true gamers" and "the Candy Crush playing rest".

Gaming journalism wasn't attacking you. I still identify as a gamer and have no problem with those articles.

 

 

I don't really care what either group of hate mongers want the word to mean, however I will not stand idly by when I am accused of things I have not done or supported. Especially not from the corrupt and unethical, one should not countenance their bullying and demonisation, in my opinion.

[Fearabbit]

 

As I've stated before and I'll repeat here (briefly):

 

 

My concern is we're talking about a group involving a woman who deemed "I saw mommy kissing Santa Claus" as sexist because it "portrays all women as promiscuous cheaters."

 

I'm not for the censorship or governance of art. PERIOD. Art is about expression, no matter how sexist, racist, ignorant or simple-minded your expression may be. That Anita would name "I saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus" as sexist is practically the posterchild for why censorship or governance of art doesn't work: because those governing art are bound to misinterpet or not understand certain types of art and then art as a whole stagnates and loses diversity, which goes against EVERYTHING art is about. I'm concerned because a group of people involving this very same overzealous, idealistic, close-minded, manipulative and deceitful (yes, she does lie and yes, she does present info in misleading ways. That's not debate, that's fact) woman seem to have the clear goal of gaining influence within the industry. Yes it's par for the course as the gaming industry was already bias and corrupt for other reasons (money buying off good reviews, Doritos pope), but from an artistic perspective...? (and no I'm by NO MEANS claiming games are incredible art as a mere .5% probably qualify as "art" in my book) From an artistic perspective this group is worse. Doritos pope wasn't trying to dictate what games can and cannot do, he was simply taking Bungie's **** in his mouth in exchange for cash.

 

 

I understood your point, and I even agree to an extent. Like I said, I'm no fan of Sarkeesian's videos. She generalizes a lot, and it's no wonder people get upset. But no matter how her videos come across, this isn't about hating on every game that has a male protagonist who saves a damsel in distress - it's about the fact that gaming would benefit from just a couple more games where that isn't the plot.

Anyone who looks at one game and uses it as an example for the whole industry is clearly doing it wrong - that goes for both sides of the argument. Just because we have Portal and Mirror's Edge that doesn't mean we don't have a problem with too many boring plots about male action heroes.

 

And as someone in one of those "gamers are dying out" articles wrote, this kind of criticism is to be expected for a medium that wants to be taken seriously. Look at the reviews for Hollywood blockbusters and you'll find the same arguments.

 

What's important is that this general criticism should not influence the review of one single movie, game or whatever. As soon as it does, we have a problem. Which is why I pick my reviewers and critics very carefully.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Fearabbit