Drama in indy gaming and games journalism

[Malcador]

Well deserved connotation, too.

[Hurlshort]

Longknife, do you really feel that coercion is the proper word here?  Even after reading the definition?  

 

Because if so, I'd imagine we are at an impasse and it's best to agree to disagree.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-zifv_D9QU

 

I don't agree with the Gamergate crowd, but this has some solid gold in it 

[Longknife]

 

 

Your entire post is just you repeating the same "mistakes" I was criticizing. All while repeating "it's not coercion cause they won't succeed" while completely failing to address that the intent is indeed there. The intent is the exact cause for concern and outrage...Likewise you claim they don't have the capacity to be coercive when I myself provided an example and licketysplit provided several more.

 

 

I also love how you seem to have missed me pointing out that the intent you mention completely hinges on their side being too stupid and/or blind to realize that they hold no power to make said intent into reality.

 

 

According to who?

 

Hence my analogy. You may say "oh Stephen Hawking wants to murder someone? No worries, he holds no power or capacity to do so" and dismiss it as case closed, I say "LOLNO we've got a problem that needs to be addressed."

 

 

 

 

 

Longknife, do you really feel that coercion is the proper word here?  Even after reading the definition?  

 

Because if so, I'd imagine we are at an impasse and it's best to agree to disagree.

 

 

I don't mean this to sound rude, but didn't you just get here and vaguely know of the details involved...?

 

Yes, I would call it coercion based on what I've seen. Whether it be coordinated articles from gaming journalists seemingly at the beck and call of Silverstring media, Zoe Quinn's treatment and handling of the people at TFYC, or the multiple game developers who've stated - personally or anonymously - that they fear for their jobs and their positions should they speak out.

 

 

And again as clarity: I don't think these people (referring to Silverstring media or the SJW side of things) have bad intentions. Nobody has bad intentions, and evil is - in many ways -  a myth. People seek to help, not to destroy. But the problem is that while their intentions are good, there seems to be this attitude of "it's ok, they'll thank us when it's over and we've won and they've seen the light" that's driving all this. Particularly, with the exact same legal line I quoted defining coercion, I think this one is why gamergate is continuing on:

 

 

(e) Cause or continue a strike, boycott or other collective action injurious to some persons business, except that such a threat is not deemed coercive when the act or omission compelled is for the benefit of the group in whose interest the actor purports to act;

 

That's the debate, that's what drives this conflict. One side is saying social equality is a duty of the people and attempting to force it to be standard, the other side is saying such "responsibilities" - while well-meaning - ultimately lead to censorship of art and other such problems, all of this only being made worse by the fact that an already undeniably corrupt journalism industry is supporting this movement.

 

Ultimately, as I've stated, you would have a VERY difficult time arguing that the agenda run by Silverstring media is the agenda the majority of gamers support, simply because GamerGate exists. FFS take the SJW to Gamer ratio in this thread as a sample. But those very people are purporting to act in our name in some way, or saying that we deserve punishment for misbehavior or what-have-you, and the result is we've basically got coercion with the "no we're helping them" scapegoat allowing it to continue.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Longknife

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

Your entire post is just you repeating the same "mistakes" I was criticizing. All while repeating "it's not coercion cause they won't succeed" while completely failing to address that the intent is indeed there. The intent is the exact cause for concern and outrage...Likewise you claim they don't have the capacity to be coercive when I myself provided an example and licketysplit provided several more.

 

 

I also love how you seem to have missed me pointing out that the intent you mention completely hinges on their side being too stupid and/or blind to realize that they hold no power to make said intent into reality.

 

 

According to who?

 

Hence my analogy. You may say "oh Stephen Hawking wants to murder someone? No worries, he holds no power or capacity to do so" and dismiss it as case closed, I say "LOLNO we've got a problem that needs to be addressed."

 

 

According to the fact that now we're having this debate instead of singing "oh those horrible gamers, they're all misogynysts and bastards who should die in a fire, I won't ever call myself a gamer again" in chorus.

 

Way I see it, a more apt analogy would be you saying "Stephen Hawking has rammed into someone with his wheelchair thingie, which proves that he intended to kill that man, only lacked the capacity to do so! He should stand on trial for attempted murder!" while me being like "erm, actually, I think if you look at it objectively, there are other rational explanations which are no less likely than yours".

Edited September 27, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Monte Carlo]

Sorry to go O/T but Hawking is my personal Chuck Norris.

[licketysplit]

 

 

Not only that. They pressure developers to conform, as has been demonstrated by the Saints Row dev kowtowing to Anita or the Larian artist being asked to change the female lead's armor. Or the Dragon's Crown fiasco. This is the real issue as I see it. Through social media, ideologues can cause change and effectively force their views to be adopted by creative entities. 

 

 

I know this may sound like a radical idea, but have you ever thought of the possibility that they might have honestly been convinced by the points the "ideologues" have raised?

 

 

If the points weren't so inane, yeah. There's a discussion to be had about representing a more diverse audience. I'm certain this comes from developers being lazy and publishers insisting on reliable formulas, not a patriarchal conspiracy. So when people like Anita want to raise intelligent, thoughtful points, I'll listen. But she's too busy ripping on Mario for rescuing the princess.

 

I should add to this: I'm sure some devs are getting PR points when they agree with SJWs, others are of course convinced, like Tim Schafer and Neil Druckmann

Edited September 27, 2014 by licketysplit

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

Not only that. They pressure developers to conform, as has been demonstrated by the Saints Row dev kowtowing to Anita or the Larian artist being asked to change the female lead's armor. Or the Dragon's Crown fiasco. This is the real issue as I see it. Through social media, ideologues can cause change and effectively force their views to be adopted by creative entities. 

 

 

I know this may sound like a radical idea, but have you ever thought of the possibility that they might have honestly been convinced by the points the "ideologues" have raised?

 

 

If the points weren't so inane, yeah. There's a discussion to be had about representing a more diverse audience. I'm certain this comes from developers being lazy and publishers insisting on reliable formulas, not a patriarchal conspiracy.

 

 

A good thing nobody attributed the bad stuff to a patriarchal conspiracy, but the developers being lazy and not thinking through what the tropes they use mean in a wider societal context

[Longknife]

 

 

 

 

Your entire post is just you repeating the same "mistakes" I was criticizing. All while repeating "it's not coercion cause they won't succeed" while completely failing to address that the intent is indeed there. The intent is the exact cause for concern and outrage...Likewise you claim they don't have the capacity to be coercive when I myself provided an example and licketysplit provided several more.

 

 

I also love how you seem to have missed me pointing out that the intent you mention completely hinges on their side being too stupid and/or blind to realize that they hold no power to make said intent into reality.

 

 

According to who?

 

Hence my analogy. You may say "oh Stephen Hawking wants to murder someone? No worries, he holds no power or capacity to do so" and dismiss it as case closed, I say "LOLNO we've got a problem that needs to be addressed."

 

 

According to the fact that now we're having this debate instead of singing "oh those horrible gamers, they're all misogynysts and bastards who should die in a fire, I won't ever call myself a gamer again" in chorus.

 

Way I see it, a more apt analogy would be you saying "Stephen Hawking has rammed into someone with his wheelchair thingie, which proves that he intended to kill that man, only lacked the capacity to do so! He should stand on trial for attempted murder!" while me being like "erm, actually, I think if you look at it objectively, there are other rational explanations which are no less likely than yours".

 

 

 

Except despite the fact that we're having this discussion, google news "Gamergate." Read the stories. It's almost universal support for the journalists and feminists, calling GamerGate nothing but a sexist outcry of trolls. That's exactly what I mean with disproportionate representation by a minority voice, as well as an example of how yes, they can gain power and influence.

 

As for your analogy, the flaw is that guess what: that's still assault. The analogy doesn't need to be murder, it can be assault. Point is they acted and attempted to get something done. Something done that they shouldn't've. And sure enough, it's reasonable to suspect he'll ram you with the wheelchair again. That's exactly what I'm doing.

[Volourn]

"Anita, she's pretty upfront about where she's coming from and what you see is what you get."

 

Upfront? She's a proven liar. On one hand she claims to be an avid gamer, on the other hand she claims she had to do lots of research because she never really played games. So which is it?

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

According to the fact that now we're having this debate instead of singing "oh those horrible gamers, they're all misogynysts and bastards who should die in a fire, I won't ever call myself a gamer again" in chorus.

 

Way I see it, a more apt analogy would be you saying "Stephen Hawking has rammed into someone with his wheelchair thingie, which proves that he intended to kill that man, only lacked the capacity to do so! He should stand on trial for attempted murder!" while me being like "erm, actually, I think if you look at it objectively, there are other rational explanations which are no less likely than yours".

 

 

 

Except despite the fact that we're having this discussion, google news "Gamergate." Read the stories. It's almost universal support for the journalists and feminists, calling GamerGate nothing but a sexist outcry of trolls. That's exactly what I mean with disproportionate representation by a minority voice, as well as an example of how yes, they can gain power and influence.

 

As for your analogy, the flaw is that guess what: that's still assault. The analogy doesn't need to be murder, it can be assault. Point is they acted and attempted to get something done. Something done that they shouldn't've. And sure enough, it's reasonable to suspect he'll ram you with the wheelchair again. That's exactly what I'm doing.

 

 

Yeah, but as far as I'm aware, that has more to do with journalistic practices on what constitutes as a "reliable source" (the articles of the gaming journalists - yes, personal tumblrs/youtube videos/tweets - no), and the story not having enough relevance for the news sites to deem the issue worthy of doing original research about than any "media conspiracy". "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence", etc.

 

Or he's just lost control of his wheelchair-thingie and didn't intend to do you harm! Which is where the analogy falls apart, because the journalists were in full control of what they wrote, I'm just doubting there was any nefarious intention behind them writing said articles. But my point is, alternate explanations always exist if one is willing to look for them (and they're not necessarily less likely than the one you've originally came up with).

 

 

 

She's a proven liar. On one hand she claims to be an avid gamer, on the other hand she claims she had to do lots of research because she never really played games. So which is it?

 

The fact that she didn't play the majority of the games she's criticizing doesn't mean she couldn't have played other games, you know.

[licketysplit]

"Anita, she's pretty upfront about where she's coming from and what you see is what you get."

 

Upfront? She's a proven liar. On one hand she claims to be an avid gamer, on the other hand she claims she had to do lots of research because she never really played games. So which is it?

 

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

[Longknife]

 But my point is, alternate explanations always exist if one is willing to look for them (and they're not necessarily less likely than the one you've originally came up with).

 

 

And this is exactly why I don't see eye to eye with the SJW side of things. I believe in this handy thing called "Occam's Razor." I don't go looking for them, I figure the most logical and simplest explanation is correct. A dozen articles all popped up at the same time voicing the same narrative and concern about Anita's safety, you suspect bias and influence from Silverstring. A dozen stories pop up about Zoe Quinn or other related parties participating in coercion with a dozen seperate people verifying or supporting the claims, they're probably guilty of at least a couple of them. And a confirmed corrupt journalism market does things that don't seem to be in the interest of gamers and more on key with propaganda to intimidate them down so they cease discussing how corrupt the journalism market is....? It's probably not in the interest of gamers and more on key with propaganda to intimidate them down so they cease discussing how corrupt the journalism market is.

 

 

 

The fact that she didn't play the majority of the games she's criticizing doesn't mean she couldn't have played other games, you know.

 

 

I would consider how much she personally plays them irrelevant, as she's more than capable of making criticisms just by watching Let's Plays. It's nothing but a ****ty move on her part to try and blend in as "one of you!!!" while in reality her interests are more in feminism. Bad PR, but hardly something to discredit her criticisms.

 

 

But the problem is how watching her videos, you get this undeniable inclination that she knows damned well she's providing some misleading info, like a college student saying "**** it" and writing something they know to be flawed on an exam or term paper, solely in the interest of having -SOMETHING- to turn in to get points. (or in her case, to meet the demands of her kickstarter)  It comes off as insulting because ultimately you get a woman who's sworn to expose sexism in gaming, and then when it comes time to do so, half of the sexism she presents has been entirely manufactured by her herself.

[Orogun01]

 

"Anita, she's pretty upfront about where she's coming from and what you see is what you get."

 

Upfront? She's a proven liar. On one hand she claims to be an avid gamer, on the other hand she claims she had to do lots of research because she never really played games. So which is it?

 

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

 

You mean when she goes out of her way to beat up women in games, to prove a point? Is like accusing a toy maker of perverting the minds of children just because you stuck a doll up your rectum.(Not specifically you though)

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 But my point is, alternate explanations always exist if one is willing to look for them (and they're not necessarily less likely than the one you've originally came up with).

 

 

And this is exactly why I don't see eye to eye with the SJW side of things. I believe in this handy thing called "Occam's Razor." I don't go looking for them, I figure the most logical and simplest explanation is correct. 

 

 

I'm just not sure suspecting a conspiracy behind the events you've described is either the most logical, or the simplest explanation there is, and this is where my point lies. What seems to be the most logical, or the simplest will vary from person to person depending on their existing knowledge, experiences and biases.

[Volourn]

"The fact that she didn't play the majority of the games she's criticizing doesn't mean she couldn't have played other games, you know."
 

You missed point. She cliamed that she was a super duper always playing type of a gamer - even bragging about her collection. But, it's proven she has told people that she's not really a gamer and because of that she had to spend a lot of time doing research. I wouldn't mind the fact she had to do researchers - afterall, research is done to learn about stuff - it's that she felt the need to brag aka lie about her game habits. Why not be simply truthful?

 

 

"She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on."
\

Yeah, agreed, espicially since it's not big deal when you kill a bunch of men in games. But, women? They're equal but more precious. LMAO  People liker her shame and ebase women as much as they do men because it belittles them and treats women like little kiddies.

[Meshugger]

 

I thought that the issue was that there's a conspiracy of gaming journalists trying to enforce an agenda and how developers should have total artistic integrity without having to do a checklist of certain inclusive elements.

 

Except total artistic integrity simply doesn't exist in the world of commercial game development, so while I appreciate the sentiment, I feel it's rather misplaced. Or, to quote a developer asked to voice her opinion on the matter:

 

 

 

 You've never had your artistic freedom trampled in your work because there's no such thing as artistic freedom in your work if it's work done for a company. You're there to make the game they pay you to make. They tell you all the time that the shade of green is not right, that the animation is too sexy or not sexy enough, that the character needs more or less clothes, that the blood isn't shiny enough. It's a part of the job: that's the reality of game development.

 

 

The finer details of a contract between two agents was not the point that i was trying to make.

[Namutree]

 

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

 

Video games should do whatever the hell they want.

[licketysplit]

 

 

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

 

Video games should do whatever the hell they want.

 

 

Agreed. I'm still unclear on whether my sarcasm in that comment is being taken seriously, lol. 

[Namutree]

 

 

 

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

 

Video games should do whatever the hell they want.

 

 

Agreed. I'm still unclear on whether my sarcasm in that comment is being taken seriously, lol. 

 

I was taking is seriously. 

[Nonek]

Video gamers stop your dreaming, can't you hear their outraged squealing.

See their fascist agenda streaming, to this battlefield.

 

From the threads resounding, let the call be sounding.

Summon all at Sommer's call, the SJF's surrounding.

 

Video gamers on to glory, this shall be your passtimes story.

Keep these burning words before ye, you are all dead.

 

 

Sorry, watched Zulu today. "Scrawny bespectacled pencil necks with weird hair, thousands of 'em."

[Hurlshort]

 

 

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

 

Video games should do whatever the hell they want.

 

 

I disagree.  This is a business, they are trying to sell a product.  They should do whatever their consumers want.  

 

Indie developers have a lot more leeway, but they still have to think is terms of marketability at some point.  Otherwise making games is just a hobby.

[Orogun01]

 

 

 

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

 

Video games should do whatever the hell they want.

 

 

I disagree.  This is a business, they are trying to sell a product.  They should do whatever their consumers want.  

 

Indie developers have a lot more leeway, but they still have to think is terms of marketability at some point.  Otherwise making games is just a hobby.

 

Consumers are fickle and ignorant of the realities of development. Quality development with target demographic on mind and customer satisfaction, that's the way to go. 

[Bryy]

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

 

Oh please.

 

*rolls eyes*

[Namutree]

 

 

 

Now wait a minute! She brings up valid points like beating up women is bad and games should not condone violence, issues I had hitherto been thoroughly confused on. 

 

Video games should do whatever the hell they want.

 

 

I disagree.  This is a business, they are trying to sell a product.  They should do whatever their consumers want.  

 

Indie developers have a lot more leeway, but they still have to think is terms of marketability at some point.  Otherwise making games is just a hobby.

 

If they want to make make money; then go ahead and do that.