Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Amentep]

I find it odd you consider what he's doing an exaggeration when you simply have not experienced the era he's referencing. You're basically claiming a parallel he's drawing is inaccurate and ridiculous when he experienced both events first-hand whereas you have not.

Since he says he's "40", the poster himself hasn't experienced at leaest one of the era he's referencing. It'd mean he was born in the 1970s; McCarthyism and the blacklisting of suspected communists was in the mid-1950s and would have been experienced by his parents and/or grandparents.

 

He goes on and mentions freedom from the religious right, which is vague enough to be a reference to the big religon in school/school prayer decisions that were made in the early 60s (Engel v Vitale, 1962 and the Abington School District v Schimpp, 1963) which he wouldn't have been around for or the fights over rap music (like the furor over Ice T's "Cop Killer") or even video games (Jack Thompson's crusade, though, wasn't really "religious") which he would have been around for.

[BruceVC]

We have a user or two from Poland here, yes?

 

I ask because anti-GG is labeling the developers of Hatred as "literally Neo-Nazis," to quote them.

 

Here: http://****novideogames.tumblr.com/post/100204212288/hatred-is-a-genocide-simulator-developed-by

 

I link it because....yknow it's funny, I read the little examples of them being Neo-Nazis and it's like "ONE OF THE FIRST TATTOOS ONE OF THEM EVER CREATED AT HIS OLD JOB WAS A SYMBOL THAT IS SOMETIMES LIKED BY NEO-NAZIS IN THE BALKAN REGION. ANOTHER ONCE ADMITTED TO BEING A FAN OF A BOXING LEAGUE THAT ONCE BANNED A BOXER FOR BEING SUPPORTIVE OF GAY RIGHTS. ARE THESE NOT THE LITERAL SCUM OF THE EARTH AND UNDENIABLE NEO-NAZIS???"  I'm at the point where I read it and I'm like "can't tell if actually Neo-Nazis or if these people are exaggerating things."

 

 

It's quite literally "the Boy who Cried Wolf." Here's a situation where they may be honest to god Neo-Nazis, and I have no idea simply because I've learned SJWs will literally call anyone Nazis and thus I'm skeptical.

 

So yeah do we have anyone from Poland here? Are those groups they reference as hate groups or homophobic or whatever -ACTUALLY- hate groups or things Neo Nazis flock to, or are they grasping at straws there?

 

 

 

Either way is irrelevant to me. Even if they were Neo-Nazis, the game doesn't spout Neo-Nazi doctrine so it's irrelevant. It's like you hate Hitler's paintings because they're bad painting, not because a Nazi painted it.

 

Yes Longknife it has been a serious accusation for a while now that the developers are associated with Neo-Nazis

 

Its another reason I dislike them, I am surprised this doesn't bother. I would think you would naturally distance yourself from anything related to Neo-Nazism

Edited December 17, 2014 by BruceVC

[Longknife]

 

I find it odd you consider what he's doing an exaggeration when you simply have not experienced the era he's referencing. You're basically claiming a parallel he's drawing is inaccurate and ridiculous when he experienced both events first-hand whereas you have not.

Since he says he's "40", the poster himself hasn't experienced at leaest one of the era he's referencing. It'd mean he was born in the 1970s; McCarthyism and the blacklisting of suspected communists was in the mid-1950s and would have been experienced by his parents and/or grandparents.

 

He goes on and mentions freedom from the religious right, which is vague enough to be a reference to the big religon in school/school prayer decisions that were made in the early 60s (Engel v Vitale, 1962 and the Abington School District v Schimpp, 1963) which he wouldn't have been around for or the fights over rap music (like the furor over Ice T's "Cop Killer") or even video games (Jack Thompson's crusade, though, wasn't really "religious") which he would have been around for.

 

 

 

Again, my mistake. I quoted him out of context from a reddit thread he made. He went on to say he experienced something similar regarding Conservatives with religion and ideals of the "classic American family household" during the Reagan administration or something. Let me see if I can't just find his thread and link to it, since that's the second time his other posts would've been nice and relevant.

[Fighter]

We have a user or two from Poland here, yes?

 

I ask because anti-GG is labeling the developers of Hatred as "literally Neo-Nazis," to quote them.

 

Here: http://****novideogames.tumblr.com/post/100204212288/hatred-is-a-genocide-simulator-developed-by

 

I link it because....yknow it's funny, I read the little examples of them being Neo-Nazis and it's like "ONE OF THE FIRST TATTOOS ONE OF THEM EVER CREATED AT HIS OLD JOB WAS A SYMBOL THAT IS SOMETIMES LIKED BY NEO-NAZIS IN THE BALKAN REGION. ANOTHER ONCE ADMITTED TO BEING A FAN OF A BOXING LEAGUE THAT ONCE BANNED A BOXER FOR BEING SUPPORTIVE OF GAY RIGHTS. ARE THESE NOT THE LITERAL SCUM OF THE EARTH AND UNDENIABLE NEO-NAZIS???"  I'm at the point where I read it and I'm like "can't tell if actually Neo-Nazis or if these people are exaggerating things."

 

Listen to TotalBiscuit's video on the matter. I trust his judgement more than that agenda driven blog with a very telling name "f*cknovideogames".

[BruceVC]

 

I find it odd you consider what he's doing an exaggeration when you simply have not experienced the era he's referencing. You're basically claiming a parallel he's drawing is inaccurate and ridiculous when he experienced both events first-hand whereas you have not.

Since he says he's "40", the poster himself hasn't experienced at leaest one of the era he's referencing. It'd mean he was born in the 1970s; McCarthyism and the blacklisting of suspected communists was in the mid-1950s and would have been experienced by his parents and/or grandparents.

 

He goes on and mentions freedom from the religious right, which is vague enough to be a reference to the big religon in school/school prayer decisions that were made in the early 60s (Engel v Vitale, 1962 and the Abington School District v Schimpp, 1963) which he wouldn't have been around for or the fights over rap music (like the furor over Ice T's "Cop Killer") or even video games (Jack Thompson's crusade, though, wasn't really "religious") which he would have been around for.

 

 

This is a very good post and debunks much of what that guy was saying. This is  another reason to question his credibility on the topic

[Chilloutman]

Yes Longknife it has been serious accusation for a while now that the developers are associated with Neo-Nazis

 

Its another reason I dislike them, I am surprised this doesn't bother. I would think you would naturally distance yourself from anything to Neo-Nazism

Labels, Labels - in todays 'politicaly correct' cutlure in Europe one can be easily labeled as whatever you want. Dont want islamic imigrants? - Nazi. Dont want state expensess supporting minorities? - neo-nazi. Dont support socialistic substitutions? - nazi and it can go on and on...

 

Simply put anyone from Texas would be considered nazi in europe

[Longknife]

Yes Longknife it has been serious accusation for a while now that the developers are associated with Neo-Nazis

 

Its another reason I dislike them, I am surprised this doesn't bother. I would think you would naturally distance yourself from anything to Neo-Nazism

 

 

 

And I would think you would have the decency to respond to posts like this before attempting to leap to "easy targets," as is your habit:

 

 

Look the reality is are you the best person to decide what games  Steam distributes? You guys have no filters and I doubt anything would be considered inappropriate

 

Also when it comes to real censorship you right it can be very subjective and hard to manage. But this is not this type of example, you just need to accept that Valve does know more about these things than most of us and they made the right decision.

 

 

Bruce?

 

 

 

Yet you continue to do so, even though I regularly chastise you for doing so and make a scene out of it. I made the above post fully expected this **** from you.

 

You may be tired of me egging you on about dodging points. Onlookers may consider my methods of constantly harassing you about it to be a **** move on my part.

 

But I couldn't give two ****s. I thoroughly believe that if you TRULY have an interest in moving forward and aren't just some idiot who likes the ego strokes one gets from being proven right - who hasn't yet learned to find value in being proven wrong - then you should be able to handle the difficult questions and address difficult points, not blatantly ignore them.

[Blarghagh]

I'm not really sure what the issue with Hatred is anyway. It's violence glorification? The violence is horrible, if anything it's more realistic approach is less glorifying of violence than Call of Duty is. The Grand Theft Auto games are far is more guilty of this by not taking violence seriously, but that's okay because it's "satire".

 

How about Postal 1 and Manhunt? They are both worse than this, and unlike GTA you cannot defend those specific games as being "satire", they are murder games. As TotalBiscuit pointed out, one of these allows you to piss in your grandmother's face before killing her. Explain to me why Steam has no problem with that, but draws the line at a game that is so aware of how terrible the main character is that he is identified solely as "the Antagonist" to point out that hey, you're the absolute evil bad guy in here.

 

Is it because it's purposeless violence? How do you know? All we have is trailers. Maybe this game is a biting social commentary on a society so broken that many of its inhabitants snap and decide the world needs to be "cured"? If anything, if it's not a commentary its definitely a reflection of that and as such it still has artistic worth (moreso than GTA anyway).

 

I'd also like to point out that some of the things I've heard said by vocal #GamerGate detractors fall directly in line with what the lead in this game would do. Like that Tait guy, who said all #GamerGaters should be put into death camps.

 

As for the accusations that the developers are neo-Nazis, all accusations thus far look to have been entirely fabricated. If credible evidence shows up, then I'll condemn them for being neo-Nazis - which is not the same as condemning everything they do, mind you. If I condemned everything the Nazis did I would only be using dirt roads.

[Fighter]

There is definitely a debate to be had on whether it is more glorifying to have violence straight forward or sweetened by being righteous or "satirical".

[BruceVC]

 

Yes Longknife it has been serious accusation for a while now that the developers are associated with Neo-Nazis

 

Its another reason I dislike them, I am surprised this doesn't bother. I would think you would naturally distance yourself from anything to Neo-Nazism

 

 

 

And I would think you would have the decency to respond to posts like this before attempting to leap to "easy targets," as is your habit:

 

 

Look the reality is are you the best person to decide what games  Steam distributes? You guys have no filters and I doubt anything would be considered inappropriate

 

Also when it comes to real censorship you right it can be very subjective and hard to manage. But this is not this type of example, you just need to accept that Valve does know more about these things than most of us and they made the right decision.

 

 

Bruce?

 

 

 

Yet you continue to do so, even though I regularly chastise you for doing so and make a scene out of it. I made the above post fully expected this **** from you.

 

You may be tired of me egging you on about dodging points. Onlookers may consider my methods of constantly harassing you about it to be a **** move on my part.

 

But I couldn't give two ****s. I thoroughly believe that if you TRULY have an interest in moving forward and aren't just some idiot who likes the ego strokes one gets from being proven right - who hasn't yet learned to find value in being proven wrong - then you should be able to handle the difficult questions and address difficult points, not blatantly ignore them.

 

Sorry for not responding earlier, I thought it was such a silly and irrelevant question no one really expected an answer. I'll gladly answer and I don't take your criticism personally at all, I know you mean well

 

I do accept Valves decision, I already said that. But they made the wrong decision because its no longer about the game. Its become something symbolically political...and they shouldn't provide a mechanism for that.

 

But I still have unwavering support for Steam and remain a committed fan

[Longknife]

 

 

I find it odd you consider what he's doing an exaggeration when you simply have not experienced the era he's referencing. You're basically claiming a parallel he's drawing is inaccurate and ridiculous when he experienced both events first-hand whereas you have not.

Since he says he's "40", the poster himself hasn't experienced at leaest one of the era he's referencing. It'd mean he was born in the 1970s; McCarthyism and the blacklisting of suspected communists was in the mid-1950s and would have been experienced by his parents and/or grandparents.

 

He goes on and mentions freedom from the religious right, which is vague enough to be a reference to the big religon in school/school prayer decisions that were made in the early 60s (Engel v Vitale, 1962 and the Abington School District v Schimpp, 1963) which he wouldn't have been around for or the fights over rap music (like the furor over Ice T's "Cop Killer") or even video games (Jack Thompson's crusade, though, wasn't really "religious") which he would have been around for.

 

 

 

Again, my mistake. I quoted him out of context from a reddit thread he made. He went on to say he experienced something similar regarding Conservatives with religion and ideals of the "classic American family household" during the Reagan administration or something. Let me see if I can't just find his thread and link to it, since that's the second time his other posts would've been nice and relevant.

 

 

 

Found it. Didn't think I would for a moment before I remembered he got reddit gold for it, made finding it easier: http://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2pj36c/hatred_back_on_steam_greenlight_how_long_do_you/cmx9yg1

 

That gives a bit more context from him. He has other posts in that thread too which you can dig up yourself from the thread topic.

[Keyrock]

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it turns out the developers (all of them for this hypothetical scenario for the sake of emphasis) of Hatred are indeed Neo-Nazis.  Does it matter?  I mean, to any one person, the fact that a game is made by Neo-Nazis may matter and may keep them from purchasing the game, and that's fine.  It's that person's money, it's that person's purchasing decision, they can choose to buy or not buy the game for any reason.  But does it matter as far the game's right to exist and be sold on a platform so long as it doesn't break said platform's terms and conditions?  Does a game made by Neo-Nazis have any less right to be sold than a game made by church going Christians, or a game made by a transgender bisexual person, or a game made by ragtag group group of developers?  My answer is no, a game made by Neo-Nazis does not have any less right to be sold than a game made by any other group, diverse or homogeneous.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Keyrock

[Blarghagh]

I do accept Valves decision, I already said that. But they made the wrong decision because its no longer about the game. Its become something symbolically political...and they shouldn't provide a mechanism for that.

 

Considering the lack of curation on even Steam titles with ILLEGAL content (i.e. stealing code, art assets and music from other people and putting them into your game) and the aforementioned worse murder simulators there is simply no logical reason to claim banning this game from Steam was not a political decision in the first place, so yes, I agree, they should never have provided a mechanism for that.

[Longknife]

 

 

Yes Longknife it has been serious accusation for a while now that the developers are associated with Neo-Nazis

 

Its another reason I dislike them, I am surprised this doesn't bother. I would think you would naturally distance yourself from anything to Neo-Nazism

 

 

 

And I would think you would have the decency to respond to posts like this before attempting to leap to "easy targets," as is your habit:

 

 

Look the reality is are you the best person to decide what games  Steam distributes? You guys have no filters and I doubt anything would be considered inappropriate

 

Also when it comes to real censorship you right it can be very subjective and hard to manage. But this is not this type of example, you just need to accept that Valve does know more about these things than most of us and they made the right decision.

 

 

Bruce?

 

 

 

Yet you continue to do so, even though I regularly chastise you for doing so and make a scene out of it. I made the above post fully expected this **** from you.

 

You may be tired of me egging you on about dodging points. Onlookers may consider my methods of constantly harassing you about it to be a **** move on my part.

 

But I couldn't give two ****s. I thoroughly believe that if you TRULY have an interest in moving forward and aren't just some idiot who likes the ego strokes one gets from being proven right - who hasn't yet learned to find value in being proven wrong - then you should be able to handle the difficult questions and address difficult points, not blatantly ignore them.

 

Sorry for not responding earlier, I thought it was such a silly and irrelevant question no one really expected an answer. I'll gladly answer and I don't take your criticism personally at all, I know you mean well

 

I do accept Valves decision, I already said that. But they made the wrong decision because its no longer about the game. Its become something symbolically political...and they shouldn't provide a mechanism for that.

 

But I still have unwavering support for Steam and remain a committed fan

 

 

 

But by your very own quote:

 

 

 

you just need to accept that Valve does know more about these things than most of us and they made the right decision.

 

 

Why does this only seem to apply when Valve bans the game but not when Valve allows it and Gabe Newell is allegedly apologizing to it's dev team?

 

 

This is exactly what people have been trying to tell you for AAAAAGES about hypocrisy and about how this is exactly why GamerGate exists: because being told by an authority figure (or someone in power) that they are right and you are wrong is not fun. This is exactly why democracy exists, and much of the tone of SJWs has been "shutup and listen to me" but when tables turn and someone is telling them to shutup and listen, they cry foul.

 

Yes, it is a foul, and that's exactly why no one should be telling anyone what they can and cannot do. The masses, democracy and the free market should determine that, as that's the fairest solution possible. And here's a pro-tip: Hatred has overwhelming support via Greenlight, and GG has always outnumbered anti-GG.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Longknife

[Amentep]

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it turns out the developers (all of them for this hypothetical scenario for the sake of emphasis) of Hatred are indeed Neo-Nazis.  Does it matter?  I mean, to any one person, the fact that a game is made by Neo-Nazis may matter and may keep them from purchasing the game, and that's fine.  It's that person's money, it's that person's purchasing decision, they can choose to buy or not buy the game for any reason.  But does it matter as far the game's right to exist and be sold on a platform so long as it doesn't break said platform's terms and conditions?  Does a game made by Neo-Nazis have any less right to be sold than a game made by church going Christians, or a game made by a transgender bisexual person, or a game made by ragtag group group of developers?  My answer is no, a game made by Neo-Nazis does not have any less right to be sold than a game made by any other group, diverse or homogeneous.

I really agree here. There is a movement to make the creative effort about the creator irregardless of the creation. Now I have no interest in Hatred (or most shooters in general) but if the game company wants to make it fine. If the game company is proven to be racist facists, the consumer can decide if they want to patronize them or not.

 

Most historical creators could never survive the standards applied to today's creators. Lovecraft was a racist, for crying out loud. He was also a product of his time and place, as are we all.

 

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, illustrating her view of Voltaire's views in The Friends of Voltaire

Edited December 17, 2014 by Amentep

[Meshugger]

Lesson of the day: It's worse to be accusated for being an "-ism", than actually being one. The former has to prove to a negative, which in itself is not possible, while the later does not care at all to begin with.

 

Just look what the devs for Hatred have to deal with.

[Fighter]

Free speech means all speech including ugly speech.

 

But having skimmed through the accusations and the response I can see that it is a similar issue to for example what's going on in Ukraine. It's Eastern Europe and the label Nazi is being thrown around very liberally, sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly. I doubt someone named "f*cknovideogames" knows what the hell they are talking about.

[Longknife]

 

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that it turns out the developers (all of them for this hypothetical scenario for the sake of emphasis) of Hatred are indeed Neo-Nazis.  Does it matter?  I mean, to any one person, the fact that a game is made by Neo-Nazis may matter and may keep them from purchasing the game, and that's fine.  It's that person's money, it's that person's purchasing decision, they can choose to buy or not buy the game for any reason.  But does it matter as far the game's right to exist and be sold on a platform so long as it doesn't break said platform's terms and conditions?  Does a game made by Neo-Nazis have any less right to be sold than a game made by church going Christians, or a game made by a transgender bisexual person, or a game made by ragtag group group of developers?  My answer is no, a game made by Neo-Nazis does not have any less right to be sold than a game made by any other group, diverse or homogeneous.

I really agree here. There is a movement to make the creative effort about the creator irregardless of the creation. Now I have no interest in Hatred (or most shooters in general) but if the game company wants to make it fine. If the game company is proven to be racist ****, the consumer can decide if they want to patronize them or not.

 

“I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall, illustrating her view of Voltaire's views in The Friends of Voltaire

 

 

 

What you guys are recognizing is an ad hominem attack.  It's when the person - not their work or their statement - is being criticized. The problem with it is Hitler loved dogs too, so should we all take to the streets and just start killing puppies? It's inobjective and doesn't do anything to accurately address and assess the work at hand.

 

 

 

Would I buy a painting from a Neo-Nazi? If I like the painting, sure.

Would I buy a book from a Neo-Nazi? If I like the book, sure.

Would I buy a video game from a Neo-Nazi? If I like the game, sure.

Does any of this mean I support Neo-Nazis or their political ideals? Absolutely not.

 

 

Pro-tip: If you are republican, you have probably purchased something from a democrat and vice versa. If you consider climate change a real and serious issue, you have purchased something from someone who does not. This does not mean you support their politics and their ideologies, it means you appreciate the service they provided you.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Longknife

[Amentep]

^I admit that I have a problem with how Orson Scott Card was run off of jobs. Sure I disagreed with his opinions, but that doesn't mean I think the man should be forced out of his career unless he "converts" to the "approved" opinions.

[Malcador]

I thought that quote was from Voltaire himself.  Well, learned something new today.  I agree with TrueNeutral in that I really don't see what the fuss is about, Hatred looks rather boring - can only massacre civilians or kill them as they scream for mercy for so long until it becomes old hat.  So do other games though.

 

It's as if people wringing their hands over this never played shooters or something to be "disgusted" by violence against NPCs in games.  Heh, like reading articles on hookers in GTA V being victimized and how one man feels remorse and guilt over killing NPCs in FP view in GTA.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Malcador

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Lesson of the day: It's worse to be accusated for being an "-ism", than actually being one. The former has to prove to a negative, which in itself is not possible, while the later does not care at all to begin with.

 

Just look what the devs for Hatred have to deal with.

It seems that perception is worse than actions to some of these people. Postmodernism in a nutshell.

 

EDIT:

Edited December 17, 2014 by KaineParker

[Keyrock]

Free speech means all speech including ugly speech.

 

Exactly.  When I support freedom, I support everybody's freedom, not just the people I like.  If I were to cherry pick only certain groups of people whose freedom I support, then I wouldn't be supporting freedom at all.  I hate Neo-Nazis.  I'm Polish, I have family that suffered and died at the hands of Nazis (obviously long before I was born) and they tore my motherland apart.  Any group that revives and shares the ideals and practices of Nazis isn't looked kindly upon by me.  I still support their right to free speech, to peacefully assemble, and to create things, whether utilitarian or artistic in nature.  I find the Westboro Baptist Church to be disgusting.  I think those people are scumbags, the lowest of the low.  I still support their rights.  I even support the hipster radical sex-negative feminist media's rights.  I vehemently disagree with them on a many good things, as I'm sure we're all aware of by now, but I support their right to speak their mind and preach their drivel.  I don't approve when Father McIntosh, Saint Anita, and Co. cherry pick, misrepresent, and outright lie, and I call them out on it, but I still support their right to spout their propaganda.

 

Now, before you tell me that I'm suppressing the journalists rights by emailing their advertisers, keep in mind (and I can only speak for myself) that I have never emailed an advertiser and demanded they stop support of a site based on not liking the journalists point of view and ideology.  In fact, I've never demanded anything in said emails.  The emails I sent were to inform said advertisers of what I perceived to be ethical breeches by journalists so that they have that information when they decide whether or not to continue being associated with said journalists.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Keyrock

[Longknife]

 

 

We have hit a point in time where someone cannot laugh at furries without people getting offended serious-facing the issue.

 

 

Edited December 17, 2014 by Longknife

[Keyrock]

@Longknife - First off, what is "TYT"?  Second, I agree with these people that it was unprofessional of the Fox morning show woman to be that unprepared for a story.  That said, I can't really look down upon her too much for her reaction to furries.  I don't completely recall the exact moment when I first found out what furries were, but I can pretty much guarantee I was not able to hold a straight face.  I also found it funny when the one TYT woman admitted to having acted the same way in the past then tried to suggest that their show shouldn't be held to the same standards she was projecting on Fox's morning show because reasons.

 

Anyway, much ado about nothing, as far as I'm concerned.

[Blarghagh]

TYT, or The Young Turks, is a liberal YouTube news show, they host (among other things) The David Pakman show. As far as I know, I could be wrong.