Journalism and bias in the gaming industry

[Meshugger]

Hahaha

 

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/04/20/anita-sarkeesian-debate-me-and-i-will-donate-10000-to-feminist-frequency-or-a-charity-of-your-choice/

 

Too bad it will never happen.

 

Btw, search for the following video on Youtube: "This Kills the Milo (Postal 2: Paradise Lost)". I cannot link it since it contains brutal but hilarious violence. I wonder what would've happened if it was Anita instead.

Edited April 20, 2015 by Meshugger

[Hurlshort]

Apparently Feminist is a bad word:

 

https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/school-censors-girls-shirt-for-yearbook-photo-116918108702.html

[Malcador]

Thought they did that as a blanket rule on political tshirts. Can understand that even with the inevitable side effects.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

You mean the articles that literally don't exist in the form gamergate is so fond of painting them as (Ie. "an organized attack against gamer identity by games journalists")?

 

Because, well, "gamergaters aren't a hate group, they just failed to interpret correctly a body of texts even a high schooler should have no problems understanding" isn't really making the movement come across any better.

 

 

Yeah... the 72 hours following Baldwin's tweet dubbing it GamerGate was in NO WAY WHATSOEVER a coordinated media blitz against standard gamer identity.

 

 

 

Had you exactly read the articles that whipped you into this frothing rage, you'd have seen pretty much all they contained was "hey look at this, Leigh Alexander said this thing and now people are upset". It's called news reporting. But you're welcome to see it as an attack against your identity.

 

 

 

 

The statistics the study relied on were sloppy, but acceptable for the conclusions it was trying to support. Sociologists have an implicit understanding that the sample sizes used generally give fairly low confidence levels.

 

Applying those statistics as "proof" that "gamers don't need diversity" is a dire statistical error, however. When applied at that scope, the sample size gives a confidence level lower than 50%! It's worse odds than that of a coin toss, and you're not seeing anybody trying to justify their conclusions with "well, it came up heads, so I must be right"! And it's the height of irresponsibility, if not malice, to claim that the study that's simply not applicable outside of its scope due to this issue was "intentionally buried by lying feminists" because "it didn't fit the agenda". If I believed for a moment that Sargon of Akkad knew anything about statistics, I'd have to hold him in absolute contempt for knowingly abusing science to support his crusade against feminism. Thankfully, I know not to attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.

 

 

So what? The paper is flawed and Sargon used their very own material against them. You can bold your text and claim contempt as much as you like, but that doesn't change the point. 

 

 

 

Serious question: how good you feel your grasp of statistics is? Because I think you might be fundamentally incapable of understanding why this video is such a huge problem. I mean, it was my whole point  that Sargon didn't "use their own material against them"; he took some statistics completely out of context and proceeded to claim that the people who are not taking them out of context are lying by omission for doing so. Which is disgustingly spineless. Aren't gamergaters supposed to be crusading against exactly this sort of "tainting [institution]* with an agenda"? Or are you seriously believing anti-feminism isn't an agenda?

 

*in this case, science

 

 

 

And where you finally said that games really do need diversity without telling how that would be implemented without turning into tyranny?

 

Do you know how to solve world hunger? Or to prevent wars?

 

Are you allowed to see world hunger and wars as problems humanity faces, despite not having a solution for them?

 

What? World hunger and wars cause death. What death does the lack of diverse representation of different minorities in video games cause? 

 

 

 

So any problem that doesn't cause deaths is now not worth talking about. Oh wait, that... includes... everything gamergate is complaining about? How does that even work?

[Volourn]

While I am anti feminism censoring the tshirt is evil to the core. That solves nothing, imbeciles. Don't do stupid stuff like that. The tshirt hurts nobody. FFS

[Malcador]

While I am anti feminism censoring the tshirt is evil to the core. That solves nothing, imbeciles. Don't do stupid stuff like that. The tshirt hurts nobody. FFS

Well it must have hurt the children making it in a third world sweatshop.

[Volourn]

Maybe she made herself?Maybe her mom did. Don't ASSume.

[Malcador]

Ah, but life is more fun that way!

[ravenshrike]

 

 

 

 

You mean the articles that literally don't exist in the form gamergate is so fond of painting them as (Ie. "an organized attack against gamer identity by games journalists")?

 

Because, well, "gamergaters aren't a hate group, they just failed to interpret correctly a body of texts even a high schooler should have no problems understanding" isn't really making the movement come across any better.

 

 

Yeah... the 72 hours following Baldwin's tweet dubbing it GamerGate was in NO WAY WHATSOEVER a coordinated media blitz against standard gamer identity.

 

 

 

Had you exactly read the articles that whipped you into this frothing rage, you'd have seen pretty much all they contained was "hey look at this, Leigh Alexander said this thing and now people are upset". It's called news reporting. But you're welcome to see it as an attack against your identity.

 

 

Yes, yes I did. Well after the fact incidentally since for various reason I was mostly off the 'net for about 5 months which overlapped the period in question. And in the first article by Alexander, I was called "obtuse ****slingers, these wailing hyper-consumers, these childish internet-arguers". The entire screed was an attempt to force identity politics(An utterly poisonous and vile piece of groupthink)  on gamer culture so that all the little people can be pegged into their small divisive holes. It was a part of 12 articles posted within about 8 hours all on the same subject. And yet somehow this WASN'T a coordinated attack? Pull the other one. Not to mention, anyone who takes anything said on twitter to be indicative of the thoughts of an actual group like virtually all of the twelve articles did either directly or through general reference to the Zoe Post, especially since both the Goon Squad and GNAA bragged about being involved in the Zoe Post and Gamergate, is an idiot. Unless you are checking twitter histories and sign up dates, trolling must as a matter of course be ignored. The same applies to forum posting, and there's less of an excuse there since it's even easier to check on most forums.

[BruceVC]

 

So if that's true then you guys need to ask some introspective questions to yourselves that should include a simple point  " what am I really objecting to"  when it comes to opposing the SJ movement ?

Now I am curious, with this "question" as to what answer you are wanting from them ?

 

Points for dismissing things as non-meaningful as, well, you just say so.

 

 

I am really disappointed, I asked you guys to give me just 3 examples of how the SJ narrative has negatively impacted your gaming experience and guess what..I get one response from Nonek who seemed to have misunderstood the question instead and  gave me examples of what GG has achieved ( looking back at my question I can see how it could be misunderstood as I didn't specify "negatively " )

 

So I'll ask again, " can you give me three meaningful examples of how the SJ agenda has actually negatively impacted your gaming experience "?

 

It can't be that hard, for nearly a year some of you guys have been highlighting various SJ contradictions and efforts to implement changes in the gaming industry. So now I am asking " well what did these changes actually translate to from a gaming perspective " 

 

This should be easy? I am interested to see the real substance behind all this anti-SJ vitriol when it comes to how your gaming experience has really changed as I don't see it?

 

 

So prove me wrong, how have you become marginalized as a white, male gamer?

 

@ Malc

 

The answer will vary and differ from person to person 

Edited April 21, 2015 by BruceVC

[Fighter]

Here comes the mockery again. This happened a while ago.

 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

Had you exactly read the articles that whipped you into this frothing rage, you'd have seen pretty much all they contained was "hey look at this, Leigh Alexander said this thing and now people are upset". It's called news reporting. But you're welcome to see it as an attack against your identity.

 

Yes, yes I did. Well after the fact incidentally since for various reason I was mostly off the 'net for about 5 months which overlapped the period in question. And in the first article by Alexander, I was called "obtuse ****slingers, these wailing hyper-consumers, these childish internet-arguers". The entire screed was an attempt to force identity politics(An utterly poisonous and vile piece of groupthink)  on gamer culture so that all the little people can be pegged into their small divisive holes. It was a part of 12 articles posted within about 8 hours all on the same subject. And yet somehow this WASN'T a coordinated attack? 

 

 

Way to miss the point, dude. Yes, Alexander's article contained some inflammatory language. (Incidentally, it was not aimed at gamers - surprise surprise -, making the other popular gater talking point, namely "games journalism turned on its audience" kind of moot.) Yes, there was another essay titled "The End of Gamers" by a certain Dan Golding, who's neither a games journalist (he's a dev), nor did he publish it on a gaming journalist website (it appeared on his personal blog). The other 12 articles - with the exception of a piece written by Arthur Chu - are mainly quoting these two and noting that people have reacted to them violently.

 

Mentioning what other people are talking about and the reaction it gets isn't a coordinated attack. It's news reporting.

[Malcador]

I am really disappointed, I asked you guys to give me just 3 examples of how the SJ narrative has negatively impacted your gaming experience and guess what..I get one response from Nonek who seemed to have misunderstood the question instead and  gave me examples of what GG has achieved ( looking back at my question I can see how it could be misunderstood as I didn't specify "negatively " )

 

So I'll ask again, " can you give me three meaningful examples of how the SJ agenda has actually negatively impacted your gaming experience "?

 

It can't be that hard, for nearly a year some of you guys have been highlighting various SJ contradictions and efforts to implement changes in the gaming industry. So now I am asking " well what did these changes actually translate to from a gaming perspective " 

 

This should be easy? I am interested to see the real substance behind all this anti-SJ vitriol when it comes to how your gaming experience has really changed as I don't see it?

 

 

So prove me wrong, how have you become marginalized as a white, male gamer?

 

@ Malc

 

The answer will vary and differ from person to person

Surprised no one's taking that bait, really ? If they do come up with something you'll just mark it as irrelevant as, well, you think so. And then when they have nothing the real reason they dislike SJ, which your laughable last question is on, is to lead them to conclude they are anti-social justice as they are bigots or something.

 

All this "social justice" stuff is pretty funny, more than damaging, when it comes to gaming - sure people (not really players) can whine and stamp their feet over anything (PC is the wrong race, orietnation, not enough of $races[x], etc.). Can be a bit annoying when media groups decide to be zealous about it, like RPS - think of their HoTS interview with Grayson going off on over sexy characters. Hm, I guess the real issue is people not gripping the fact that the game's NPCs aren't real, was one thing I was baffled at when Gamespot had a video on a guy feeling guilty for murdering people in GTA V FP. Then I guess all the crap about inequality in game NPCs flows from there.

[Sakai]

more than damaging

Well how exactly it is more than damaging?  

[Malcador]

I guess that was a grammar mistake, the comma after funny.

[BruceVC]

 

I am really disappointed, I asked you guys to give me just 3 examples of how the SJ narrative has negatively impacted your gaming experience and guess what..I get one response from Nonek who seemed to have misunderstood the question instead and  gave me examples of what GG has achieved ( looking back at my question I can see how it could be misunderstood as I didn't specify "negatively " )

 

So I'll ask again, " can you give me three meaningful examples of how the SJ agenda has actually negatively impacted your gaming experience "?

 

It can't be that hard, for nearly a year some of you guys have been highlighting various SJ contradictions and efforts to implement changes in the gaming industry. So now I am asking " well what did these changes actually translate to from a gaming perspective " 

 

This should be easy? I am interested to see the real substance behind all this anti-SJ vitriol when it comes to how your gaming experience has really changed as I don't see it?

 

 

So prove me wrong, how have you become marginalized as a white, male gamer?

 

@ Malc

 

The answer will vary and differ from person to person

Surprised no one's taking that bait, really ? If they do come up with something you'll just mark it as irrelevant as, well, you think so. And then when they have nothing the real reason they dislike SJ, which your laughable last question is on, is to lead them to conclude they are anti-social justice as they are bigots or something.

 

All this "social justice" stuff is pretty funny, more than damaging, when it comes to gaming - sure people (not really players) can whine and stamp their feet over anything (PC is the wrong race, orietnation, not enough of $races[x], etc.). Can be a bit annoying when media groups decide to be zealous about it, like RPS - think of their HoTS interview with Grayson going off on over sexy characters. Hm, I guess the real issue is people not gripping the fact that the game's NPCs aren't real, was one thing I was baffled at when Gamespot had a video on a guy feeling guilty for murdering people in GTA V FP. Then I guess all the crap about inequality in game NPCs flows from there.

 

I'll  tell you what Malc, I'll make it even simpler. Forget the word "meaningful" 

 

Just give me 3 examples where the SJ narrative has negatively impacted your gaming experience 

 

So this means when you start to play a game and suddenly find that SJ influence has  changed something that you use to consider part of the entertainment factor of the game

 

 

So lets say for example killing hookers in GTAV was what you really enjoyed and now Rockstar has removed Hookers, this will lead to a change in your entertainment factor in playing GTAV

 

I want to hear examples like this, no judgement I promise. Because I am honestly battling to find any examples that justify this resistance to aspects of the SJ movement within gaming and how it pertains to games ( because surly this discussion is actually about gaming right and how unintended SJ actions are really effecting our games negatively ? )

[Malcador]

Already gave you a response, though when I had taken the experience as things both in game and out. If Rockstar did ban you from killing hookers in GTA that would definitely lower my opinion of them and diminish the urge to play their games, in your example. As you said, all these SJ ninnies are toothless, as of now anyway, maybe the Jihad will catch on and game makers will have to cave to their demands.

 

Maybe that is the concern with this lot ? Best way to kill something is in the crib, after all, heh.

[Amentep]

Way to miss the point, dude. Yes, Alexander's article contained some inflammatory language. (Incidentally, it was not aimed at gamers

Really?

 

How is

 

"Gamer" isn't just a dated demographic label that most people increasingly prefer not to use. Gamers are over. That's why they're so mad.

 

Not aimed at gamers?  What Alexander's article did was say "All those people we don't agree with and don't like on the internet - they're 'gamers' now.  We're not gamers.  So lets start making it so their POV is ignored."

 

That's how I took it at least - you can argue that's not what she wanted to imply, but again that's how it seemed to me.

 

I'm not saying GamersGate has been a better group (for every interesting discussion of potentially questionable ethics in journalism situation there seems to be a dozen or more instances of someone talking about what Arthur Chu, Brianna Wu, Anita Sarkeesian or Zoe Quinn did today) and it seems to me that both sides pretty much feel the other is some sort of reprehensible sub-human group that its okay to harass and I'm not for harassment, doxxing or anything else of individuals on the internet (about as much as I can say is if someone is doing something proveably illegal, being able to identify them to law enforcement is useful - but at least so far there aren't laws against being an **** or holding unpopular opinions). 

 

And yes those elements are only part of either group, but they're a problem for both group that (IMO) each is willing to turn a blind eye to.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Amentep

[TrashMan]

I wanted to hear a lot of things in these discussions from you Bruce, but you never delivered.

So why should we now?

As someone said eariler - I'm not convinced you're posting in good faith anymore.

You want? Why should I even care what you want at this point?

 

As for SJW influence - it did ruin quite a few games with pointless pandering. It is possible the games would have sucked without it, but I guess we'll never know.

[BruceVC]

I wanted to hear a lot of things in these discussions from you Bruce, but you never delivered.

So why should we now?

As someone said eariler - I'm not convinced you're posting in good faith anymore.

You want? Why should I even care what you want at this point?

 

As for SJW influence - it did ruin quite a few games with pointless pandering. It is possible the games would have sucked without it, but I guess we'll never know.

Can we not forget the past and focus on the future...a future where we endeavor to debate in good faith?

 

Maybe you can start by mentioning these examples where SJ influence has ruined a game for you...you said a "few games ", can you go into more detail about exactly what and how the game was ruined?. There will be no judgment from me so just be honest?

[Hurlshort]

 

As for SJW influence - it did ruin quite a few games with pointless pandering. It is possible the games would have sucked without it, but I guess we'll never know.

 

Can you name the games?

 

Bioware is pushing a socially progressive agenda, but that seems to be coming from the writers and developers, rather than pandering to an outside influence.

[Nonek]

Ah progressive, I remember thinking that when Ultima introduced romances, boy gay and straight, an option to change gender and various issues covering philosophy and religion twenty plus years ago. Or its subtle message of tolerance and the dangers of speciesism in VI, along with a new species whom were vastly anatomically different from humans, and whom had been disenfranchised by the protagonists heroics. Or the study of moral absolutism with which Blackthorne twisted the eight virtues in V, and how those looking to judge and hate others were all too quick to denounce their fellow man. Or the lifelong quest for virtue that the Avatar undertook in IV, setting the stage for all that was to follow.

 

A pity Elizabeth and Abraham came along.

[BruceVC]

Ah progressive, I remember thinking that when Ultima introduced romances, boy gay and straight, an option to change gender and various issues covering philosophy and religion twenty plus years ago. Or its subtle message of tolerance and the dangers of speciesism in VI, along with a new species whom were vastly anatomically different from humans, and whom had been disenfranchised by the protagonists heroics. Or the study of moral absolutism with which Blackthorne twisted the eight virtues in V, and how those looking to judge and hate others were all too quick to denounce their fellow man. Or the lifelong quest for virtue that the Avatar undertook in IV, setting the stage for all that was to follow.

 

A pity Elizabeth and Abraham came along.

 

Yeah it does sound like the earlier Ultima games were indeed very progressive for there  time

 

Its good that Bioware has taken up the torch of " trying to provide a truly inclusive gaming environment for all "   

[Nonek]

Yes it's nice to see them regress, though I would say they're not inclusive if you want good writing, plotting, strong characters with some brains or self motivation, or a refined sense of humour. Still if you want blatant flattery of the protagonist, idiotic NPC's, a narrative that is repetitive and dull, antagonists that are pathetic cliches and lots (and I mean lots) of endless grinding then they are perfectly suited to ones taste.

 

Edit: Sorry I forgot the sub par Joss Whedon humour, almost Wildean in its subtlety.

Edited April 21, 2015 by Nonek

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Way to miss the point, dude. Yes, Alexander's article contained some inflammatory language. (Incidentally, it was not aimed at gamers

Really?

 

How is

 

"Gamer" isn't just a dated demographic label that most people increasingly prefer not to use. Gamers are over. That's why they're so mad.

 

Not aimed at gamers?  What Alexander's article did was say "All those people we don't agree with and don't like on the internet - they're 'gamers' now.  We're not gamers.  So lets start making it so their POV is ignored."

 

 

Well, that's a supremely unkind reading - I mean, she specified very particular behaviors that characterize the subset of the gaming demographic she was writing her article about. 

 

More to the point, by "it wasn't aimed at gamers" I meant it in the "intended audience" sense. Gamasutra is a website specifically for developers. Therefore "she turned on her own audience" is a colossal misreading of the situation, since gamers were never her audience to begin with.