Journalism and sexism in the games industry

[Meshugger]

 

- eCeleb-drama: Brianna Wu's husband seems to have been quite abuse according to his ex-wife: http://theralphretort.com/giant-spacekats-frank-wu-under-fire-as-ex-wife-details-domestic-violence-0124015/

Not really sure how this is relevant to GamersGate - and bothering to discuss it in a GamersGate context (IMO) just feeds the idea that GamersGate isn't about ethics in journalism.

 

 

Relevant? It's fun goddammit!

[Meshugger]

I just wrote my first review for Based Gamer (Bayonetta 2).  I did my best to be thorough and as objective as I possibly could be.  Plus, I left them some suggestions for things that could be improved.  Most notably, there was no section for Content/Value (how appropriate you feel the amount of content was for the price tag), which I feel should be a section.  On the bright side, I like the new ratings (Needs Improvement, Average, Excellent, Exceptional) better than the previous.  It will be interesting to see if anything comes of this site.  I'll certainly try to do what I can to help it along.  I'll likely write another review or two tomorrow since I'll almost certainly be home (we're about to get hammered by a major snow storm), provided I don't lose power or if I do, for however long my laptop lasts.

 

Edit:  Thinking about it some more, I think I'm going to suggest that they change "Excellent" to "Good' or "Great".  It just might be confusing having 2 ratings that not only start with the same letter, but also look alike a bit.

 

The site is already online? I haven't even seen it in the #GG twitter-feed. She needs to promote it more.

[Amentep]

On the bright side, I like the new ratings (Needs Improvement, Average, Excellent, Exceptional) better than the previous.

I'm not sure how "Needs Improvement" helps a shipped game unless the idea is that it can be fixed in a patch.

 

I'd probably suggest a more complex (possibly byzantine) rating system, though so may not be the best choice for advice.

[Amentep]

Oops, posted new instead of editing my previous post.

 

 

 

- eCeleb-drama: Brianna Wu's husband seems to have been quite abuse according to his ex-wife: http://theralphretort.com/giant-spacekats-frank-wu-under-fire-as-ex-wife-details-domestic-violence-0124015/

Not really sure how this is relevant to GamersGate - and bothering to discuss it in a GamersGate context (IMO) just feeds the idea that GamersGate isn't about ethics in journalism.

 

Relevant? It's fun goddammit!

 

While gossip about celebrities has always been fodder for entertainment, I'll stick by my assertion that gamersgaters in general are handing the anti-gamersgate group "proof" that gamersgate isn't about ethics in journalism the more people who profess to be part of the movement spend their time talking about the personal lives of the people on the other side.

Edited January 26, 2015 by Amentep

[Keyrock]

 

I just wrote my first review for Based Gamer (Bayonetta 2).  I did my best to be thorough and as objective as I possibly could be.  Plus, I left them some suggestions for things that could be improved.  Most notably, there was no section for Content/Value (how appropriate you feel the amount of content was for the price tag), which I feel should be a section.  On the bright side, I like the new ratings (Needs Improvement, Average, Excellent, Exceptional) better than the previous.  It will be interesting to see if anything comes of this site.  I'll certainly try to do what I can to help it along.  I'll likely write another review or two tomorrow since I'll almost certainly be home (we're about to get hammered by a major snow storm), provided I don't lose power or if I do, for however long my laptop lasts.

 

Edit:  Thinking about it some more, I think I'm going to suggest that they change "Excellent" to "Good' or "Great".  It just might be confusing having 2 ratings that not only start with the same letter, but also look alike a bit.

 

The site is already online? I haven't even seen it in the #GG twitter-feed. She needs to promote it more.

 

I don't think it's up yet.  They sent me an email because I am a contributor and I registered for a user name.  The email has a short survey and the option to review a game, which I did.  I think they're collecting some reviews before hand so they can have something on the site when it does go up and not just  "hey, here's our site with almost no content, stay tuned".  Also, maybe (hopefully) they want to screen reviews for stupid JOKEZ reviews before putting them up?

 

 

On the bright side, I like the new ratings (Needs Improvement, Average, Excellent, Exceptional) better than the previous.

I'm not sure how "Needs Improvement" helps a shipped game unless the idea is that it can be fixed in a patch.

 

I'd probably suggest a more complex (possibly byzantine) rating system, though so may not be the best choice for advice.

 

"Needs Improvement" is a nicer war of saying "Bad" or "Sucks". 

Edited January 26, 2015 by Keyrock

[Amentep]

"Needs Improvement" is a nicer war of saying "Bad" or "Sucks". 

I understand that, I just think that a rating system should be clear and consistant which it doesn't feel like it is with the mixed concepts.

 

In other words, if "Needs Improvement" is the lowest rating, then your average rating should be "No Improvement Necessary" and your highest rating could be "Other games should follow this standard", therefore being clear and consistant.

 

"Needs Improvement" isn't the opposite of "Excellent" (although now I'm thinking "UnExcellent" would make a great low end rating).

 

But again, I'd go for something more complex altogether. Probably a two tiered goals/expectations based review system where each game was reviewed against what it tries to do (goals) and where it fits within its genre and system and even what the reviewer felt it should be (expectations). And I'd probably be the only one who wanted to review it that way. lol.

[Longknife]

Irony moment: I felt compelled to write up something on another forum about how Binding of Isaac is art, an analysis of what it's trying to say and why it should qualify as art and not "just a game."

 

I then realized I feel I could do a much ****ing better job at that than actual video games journalists. Not like in a "lol they're so bad anyone could do it," but like I feel analyzing stuff is something I'm good at.

 

And here I am hunting for work while these guys are getting paid money and bribes to say "Far Cry 4 iz gewd, go buy it." Meanwhile the SJW crew wants to scream about how games need more artistic meaning, but they have a clear agenda and bias that prevents them from...yknow, actually recognizing the artistic titles. (New Vegas, Dark Souls (not 2. Sorry 2, you're a good game but you had no story), Binding of Isaac)

 

Crazy world... :c

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I then realized I feel I could do a much ****ing better job at that than actual video games journalists.

We all could. I have to say that discussions with you people about videogames is usually far more informative than any review from one of these sites.

[Blarghagh]

Discussing isn't the same being a good writer, though.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Discussing isn't the same being a good writer, though.

True, but D students in my 10th grade English class were better writers than games bloggers. And N.

[Orogun01]

 

Discussing isn't the same being a good writer, though.

True, but D students in my 10th grade English class were better writers than games bloggers. And N.

 

Either that's hyperbole or you went to a gifted school.

[Longknife]

Discussing isn't the same being a good writer, though.

 

And even so, I meant more in that...

 

I think there's one thing SJWs got right: games should be more artistic. My difference in opinion is I can recognize this is my wish whereas they seem to want to somehow legislate art, which I consider to breach freedom of speech. We also disagree on what makes something art.

 

 Make no mistake, games are art. Any form of media where one can express themselves has the capacity to be an art form; just because 95% of video games choose not to utilize this does not invalidate their capacity to do so.

 

  This is what amazes me though: they claim to want to see more artistic statements from art, and yet where are the articles attempting to disect meaning from games? Binding of Isaac has very short, ambiguous "endings" you get upon completion of a successful run. Me personally, I watch those endings and feel confused or uninformed. The curious part of me hates this, so I strive to dissect meaning from the endings, until I either do so or deem the game as a meaningless, pretentious piece of ****.

 

Why does this not happen in games journalism? Why do we not see these very same journalists attempting to explain why something is art beyond empty statements such as "the story and characters are enchanting and memorable?" Why does the very same nitwit hooligan who claims "art without purpose/a statement is meaningless" fail to derive any meanings from New Vegas beyond "female hookers, MISOGYNY?"

 

 

  I could, quite easily, write up an explanation for you right now that explains my interpretation of the Isaac endings, what the story is as a whole and what meaning I personally derive from it, while also tying in the quality of the soundtrack and music in that explanation, all while combining all of that within a review of the game.

 

It's not that hard, and yet I personally never see anything beyond empty statements from these journalists, as if there's this pretentious attitude of claiming to understand art and it's artistic value while not actually being able to explain why something is art. Flashy **** with lots of cinematics like Gone Home and Heavy Rain gets praised as art, subtle stuff that doesn't need flashy lights to make it's case like Dark Souls and Binding of Isaac gets COMPLETELY overlooked. Then lo and behold, go onto youtube or metacritic, Dark Souls has a big cult following that dissects every statue, every enemy and every item and finds purpose and story plot within it, whereas Binding of Isaac is ranked second amongst Metacritic scores. Meanwhile Far Cry 4 gets a pass for horrendous terriawful writing, much like 3 did. (at most journos acknowledged gamers thought the story sucked, but then gave the devs a platform with which to try and explain it)

 

 I'm confrontational by nature. I have a stance that no, not EVERYTHING is art like some willy nilly "EVERYBODY WINS AND IS SPECIAL!" label that you get just for making something. By all means if you make something, good for you, but let's not go about being so broad that CoD gets to be called art. No, to me art in a meaningful sense of the word means the creation has purpose and meaning that was expressed wonderfully and coherently, and yes, I do believe one can explain and analyze what makes something art in that sense of the term, and if you cannot, then it probably isn't art in that sense of the term.

 

 

 So overall tl;dr, the amount of claims that these guys know "art" while doing **** all to defend that claim, meanwhile neglecting titles that deserve the recognition, is insanity.

Edited January 26, 2015 by Longknife

[Blarghagh]

I didn't mean you specifically, it was more in response that everyone here could do it. There's a couple of people here that would be great and I think you're one of them. If you did a gaming blog, I'd totally read it. But those people are mostly exceptions, not the rule.

 

I do agree with you that a lot of things get unfairly ignored or unfairly praised. A lot of game developers or games get bashed for sexism, but you barely ever get true praise for games that don't do it, and if you do, it's misdirected. I've mentioned before that Dear Esther very unfairly gets praised for it since the game is the literal definition of the women in refrigerators trope, and then Bayonetta has a confident, powerful character that embraces her feminine side and it gets criticism because of some "male gaze" camera angles? I wish there were more games that had confident, powerful women without emasculating them.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

Discussing isn't the same being a good writer, though.

 

True, but D students in my 10th grade English class were better writers than games bloggers. And N.

Either that's hyperbole or you went to a gifted school.

It's hyperbole, but games bloggers aren't particularly good writers.

[Blarghagh]

The same applies to just about everything, though. Sturgeon's Law, I believe it's called. 90% of everything is tripe. To compare, movie reviews, book reviews, music reviews, etc. aren't any better than game reviews. Hell, especially not music reviews. Music reviews are worse for the simple fact that Pitchfork exists.

[Amentep]

I think there's one thing SJWs got right: games should be more artistic.

I'm not sure I agree - in so much as I think any thing that is created has to be artistic or fail.

 

What I would say is that games could use more art and could use more ambition. If you look at film, for example, we have decades of criticism but we also have some fairly prestigious awards that aren't simple popularity contests. Wonky politics of the Academy Awards or Golden Globes aside, studios see winning those awards as worth the risk of investing in narratives of questionable commercial value.

 

There really doesn't seem to be a non-commercial reward for taking risks in video games (The Spike Video Game awards are essentially a popularity contest and the IGF awards seem to be a vastly different sort of thing than the artistic awards of the motion pictures).

[Keyrock]

I think there is room for games to be more artistic.  I feel there is room for games to be more diverse.  I feel there is room for games to be educational.  I feel there is room for games to deal with unpleasant topics and to disturb.  But I also feel there is room for games to still be goofy nonsensical romps.  Heck, I feel there is room for games to have giant boobs in bikini armor and there is room for hentai dating sims.

Edited January 26, 2015 by Keyrock

[Volourn]

 "I feel there is room for games to be more diverse."

 

I agree. Too bad SJWs don't want diverse games. They want a specific type of game and want all other types they dissaprove of banned. That's evil.

[Longknife]

I do agree with you that a lot of things get unfairly ignored or unfairly praised. A lot of game developers or games get bashed for sexism, but you barely ever get true praise for games that don't do it, and if you do, it's misdirected. I've mentioned before that Dear Esther very unfairly gets praised for it since the game is the literal definition of the women in refrigerators trope, and then Bayonetta has a confident, powerful character that embraces her feminine side and it gets criticism because of some "male gaze" camera angles? I wish there were more games that had confident, powerful women without emasculating them.

 

 

I was actually typing up another wall of text in response to this, but decided it's largely a tangent relating to my take on feminism and male-female interactions. What I do wanna say though is:

 

When did feminism become synonymous with art? Dear Esther doesn't get more artistic points for being pro-feminism, that's not how it works. And yet we live in a day and age where video games journalism thinks this is the case.

 

Art is about addressing an idea, concept, emotion, experience, or whatever that's SO important to you that you feel it's worth dedicating artistic work towards. Art is about making something that speaks for itself and represents that concept, to a degree that people who are also familiar with said concept can intuitively recognize something about the artistic work and enjoy it, whether they understand why or not. That's why people who can't let go of the past or have some life-changing event that haunts them or changed them (a LOT of people) are fond of Cowboy Bebop, that's why those who feel they've been lied to by society might enjoy Death of a Salesman, that's why those who feel plagued by a society that misses the point might enjoy the Importance of Being Earnest. THIS is art:

 

 

  Feminism is more politics, and has little to do with art, if anything at all. I think I've mentioned before that I took a couple english classes and for a term paper we had to interpret a classical work of literature in a way it hadn't been interpreted before (or reinforce a minority opinion in a meaningful way) using one of the interpretations we'd been taught. I actually chose feminism, and you know why? Because it was the easiest ****ing one, and the one with the most citation work to build off of. It wasn't out of an interest in the interpretation, it was a lament that the guidelines felt counter-intuitive and restrictive ("interpret a 400 year old work of literature in a way that hasn't really been done before using the preset interpretation guidelines taught to you" THEN IT'S NOT NEW IS IT. Sorry english majors, I think you guys learn some neat stuff, but the attempts to validate itself seemed like an absolute ****ing farce 90% of the time to me) and I couldn't actually write a paper the way I wanted, so I was copping out with the easy road. And big surprise, most of the class picked feminism too. But I digress...

 

  Again, my point is more that I feel these people wouldn't know art if it took a dump on their faces while they were sleeping. And yet here they are awkwardly claiming to know what's art, and they're actually getting paid for it, even when - as your post highlights - there's this weird belief within the industry that art is about political statements rather than expression.

 

Yes there's a double standard in their methods, but even if there were not, their methods are fundamentally flawed to begin with.

 

 

 

I'm not sure I agree - in so much as I think any thing that is created has to be artistic or fail.

 

 

Wasn't my meaning. My meaning was more, video games have the exact same artistic potential as TV, cinema, literature and any other form of media. Despite this, thusfar developers primarily seem interested in realizing it's financial potential rather than it's artistic potential. We're an industry of Michael Bay films, where movies about explosions are the expected and accepted norm. I would not be against seeing this go 50-50 with mindless, fun entertainment vs. art rather than 95-5.  I would not mind seeing game franchises like Elder Scrolls and Far Cry be motivated to hire at least one god damned writer worth a darned.

Edited January 26, 2015 by Longknife

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I think devs should be free to create the games they wish. The demand for a multitude of games is sitting untapped and I would love to see devs creating games that aren't clones of other titles, even if I don't play said hypothetical games.

[Blarghagh]

Well, I reject the notion of art myself and I've had that discussion at length in one of the previous threads so I'm not going to get into that, but I didn't mean to imply feminism and art are similar. My point was more: Dear Esther is somehow art despite its inherent misogyny but Bayonetta can't be considered art because it objectifies women?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

If I take a piss on a bible, is that art? Are a few lines on paper art? Is Red Velvet Cake from my favorite shop art?

 

Art is ultimately subjective, therefore attempting to qualify something as art is ultimately flawed. Best to keep freedom of expression so we can have "open doors till you find out your sister is a lesbian" simulators and pewpew shooters IMO.

[Zoraptor]

 

Not really sure how this is relevant to GamersGate - and bothering to discuss it in a GamersGate context (IMO) just feeds the idea that GamersGate isn't about ethics in journalism.

 

 

Agreed, Gamersgate is about ethics in selling you games, not about disseminating personal information. At present they want me to buy 'Dead Island' which I hear had a totally non sexist bloody-yet-shapely-bust-of-a-bust as part of its physical collectors' edition which appalled the delicate flowers at RPS so much they got it pulled. Unfortunately it's a steam key like most of the stuff they try and sell me and I suspect I'd find the gameplay trivial and repetitive, so I will decline.

[Longknife]

If I take a piss on a bible, is that art? Are a few lines on paper art? Is Red Velvet Cake from my favorite shop art?

 

Art is ultimately subjective, therefore attempting to qualify something as art is ultimately flawed. Best to keep freedom of expression so we can have "open doors till you find out your sister is a lesbian" simulators and pewpew shooters IMO.

 

It is subjective, but to me there's art and there's art.

 

Art is the idea of expression and should be defended to the grave, art is expression done eloquently and coherently. I don't mean to sound pretentious or condescending, I simply feel we'd all be lying to ourselves if we dared claim there isn't "art" that isn't art at all. We've all encountered something that technically qualifies as art that doesn't feel like art at all, and I don't think we should be afraid of acknowledging this truth. That said, trying to use that truth as a reason to go on a crusade to legislate art is part of the reason we're even having an issue with the video game industry, so you let that guy piss on the bible, you let that guy nail a banana to a wall and you let that guy make his giant buttplug tree in France.

 

 

 

I merely wished to highlight that if someone were to ask me to put into words what makes Cowboy Bebop, Binding of Isaac, the Importance of Being Earnest, Fallout New Vegas or Death of a Salesman art (and I mean art), I could put it into words in the form of a speech or essay. Despite this, we apparently have an industry that's supposed to house people who write for a living - professional journalists - and yet they can't do this. To top it off, these very same journalists often claim art is what they'd like to see more of and that's the true reason why they're critical of the industry. But of course, "art" when spoken by them remains an ambiguous term and they make no attempts to define what art means to them (as I've done in my previous posts), and the result is a bunch of seemingly random incoherent judgements where a game that seems to meet their criteria will get completely overlooked while another that offers very very little in the way of artistic value gets resounding praise.

 

 

  All I'm saying is I've again realized (cause I'd already realized it before) that the term art is being dragged through the mud by these people, all in the interest of defending their corruption. And that to me is disgusting, especially when I'm now playing the first game I've wanted to praise artistically in years, and I see it's received no such praise by these alleged professionals. (or at least I haven't found any)

Edited January 26, 2015 by Longknife

[Amentep]

Despite this, we apparently have an industry that's supposed to house people who write for a living - professional journalists - and yet they can't do this.

I suspect the reality of publishing gets in the way here.

 

Game Reviewers are probably more than likely backgrounded as gamers and not journalists (because one of the pre-requisites is being willing to play a lot of games for a long time).

 

Game Reviewers probably don't get to finish a game before having to review it, making their reviews more of extended hands-on previews than reviews that can discuss the game as a totality (and thus keeping them from making more nuanced critical analysis if that is their want).