That's why I specifically wrote that the law enforcement doesn't have the proper knowledge and powers to uphold the law on the Internet, not that we don't have the proper laws for the Internet.
Censorship? There is no censorship!
- Thread starter cronicler
- Start date
eh, sorry, I tend to read posts way to fast. Curse my brain.
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
There's kind of a difference between individual actions gamergate condemns and doesn't condone, and collective efforts.
'Collective effort' defined of course by whether you want to take credit for it, not by whether or not it was actually done by a collective effort of various GamerGaters. Because the doxxing of srhbutts and spreading of those dox? Done by GamerGate and many GamerGaters. Spreading all of those lies about Anita Sarkeesian, about Brianna Wu, about everyone else you've targeted over the past five months? All done by GamerGaters. Defending 8chan's hosting child porn? Also done by GamerGaters. All done by collective efforts of many different GamerGaters.
No, dude, that's not how movements work. That's not how responsibility and accountability work. If you want to take credit for some of it, you have to take responsibility for all of it.
No, dude, that's not how movements work. That's not how responsibility and accountability work. If you want to take credit for some of it, you have to take responsibility for all of it.
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
There's kind of a difference between individual actions gamergate condemns and doesn't condone, and collective efforts.
Cyberfiend
First time out of the vault
Honestly? I haven't trusted game journalism since TOPSM UK gave Dragon Age origins a 5/10 because "the graphix ain't good", but then went on to give Dragon Age 2: Electric Boogaloo a 8/9. As much as I can appreciate the finer points of what Gamer gaters are trying to convey... It's all a bit late to the party, isn't it? Where were all these oh so concerned 'consumer advocates' literally years ago?
Not saying there isn't an ethics problem in the gaming industry, or that there HASN'T been whistle blowing in the past. I'm just a little sceptical is all.
Then again, I don't trust the average, metacritic dwelling, ragetarded fanboy to give me a reliable recommendation either. Or any pseudo-feminist. Or Phil Fish. Or Chloe Sagal and friends.
Meh, I just don't really see what the fuss is about really. on either side. I'm surprised it's still going tbh.
Not saying there isn't an ethics problem in the gaming industry, or that there HASN'T been whistle blowing in the past. I'm just a little sceptical is all.
Then again, I don't trust the average, metacritic dwelling, ragetarded fanboy to give me a reliable recommendation either. Or any pseudo-feminist. Or Phil Fish. Or Chloe Sagal and friends.
Meh, I just don't really see what the fuss is about really. on either side. I'm surprised it's still going tbh.
You can't say that action A) is the consequence of collective efforts and action B) is not when both are the result of large groups of the same people. There is no "gamergate condemns this" because there are a ton of gamergaters out there doing exactly what I described, and they represent the movement just as much as you do because you fucktards are too clueless to understand the concept of organization.
Eh, GamerGate is a fairly tiny core of folks now. They'll probably keep going for years, just as 9/11 truthers are still going, though.Cyberfiend said:
Ceratisa
Sarcastic SOB
Sanders you honestly can't be comparing people who want ethical standards in gaming journalism to truthers. We have people currently getting harassed because they want their game to stand on its own instead of how much they pay or bribe their reviewer.
No one is getting harassed because of that. Seriously, no one. People are getting harassed over some bullshit, certainly, but that's absolutely not why. No one on any side of this stuff wants corrupt game reviews. Literally no one. Also reviewers don't get bribed, that's much too direct a way of corrupting the process -- influence through advertisements, preview access, embargoes and stuff like that is how it happens. Incidentally, all done by big publishers -- the indie stuff GamerGate focuses on is completely irrelevant, which should be obvious given how little money is involved in the indie segment.
I'm comparing GamerGate to 9/11 truthers because the entire movement is built on insane conspiracy theories. Maybe you'd prefer birthers? Benghazi? Pick a conspiracy. Doesn't matter which. It all functions the same way. You forward a theory, create a basis of bullshit and then every bit of information gets twisted (or just downright invented) to fit the conspiracy. Remember how it all started? Zoe Quinn fucking someone to get a good review? Never happened. Complete fiction. The very start of the movement was complete bullshit, and it's only accumulated more bullshit throughout. People posting similar articles as a reaction to developments and each other happens every single day in every single form of media, it is not a conspiracy. Having mailing lists where journalists in the same field can discuss stuff is fairly common (especially in a field with lots of freelancers) and is not the same as collusion or coordinating coverage. Discussing stuff is also not collusion. Allistair Pinsof wasn't "blacklisted", he was fired for grossly unethical conduct and disobeying direct orders from his boss, and thus no one wants to touch him. Critics who insult their audience are not behaving unethically, they're simply rude (or hard truth-tellers -- also gamers were not Leigh Alexander's audience in that piece). Feminist critics are not trying to end games or censor them or prevent them from being made or forcing their views on anyone, they're simply critiquing media. Creating a tool to block people on Twitter is not illegal, nor an infringement on free speech. Exposing a child porn hub is not redistributing child porn. Sarkeesian never invented death threats, never invented reporting them, never said she doesn't play games, never misrepresented Hitman: Absolution, and never really did any of the insane shit GamerGate thinks she did. I could go on and on and on and on with the insane shit GamerGate thinks.
Yes, these are all things GamerGate believes and continues to repeat to this day, with varying degrees of frequency. It's all shit that has shown up here on NMA.
"GameJournoPros and Gamers-Are-Dead-articles => conspiracy!" is the equivalent of steel melting at whatever-the-fuck-degrees and jet fuel not reaching that temperature, therefore the twin towers couldn't have collapsed because of planes flying into it. It is not evidence of a conspiracy. It's evidence that people don't understand how journalism and physics work, respectively. It's also evidence that both are dumb conspiracy theories.
Wastewander
It Wandered In From the Wastes
Yep. That's been one of the biggest problems with GamerGate's "ethics in gaming journalism" so far. Big companies get away with shit way too easily, and it's been apparent for years, but what sets this off? Was it another Gerstmann incident where a reviewer got fired for a negative review, or a publisher decided to not send a review copy to a site due to a previous negative review (I know for a fact Square-Enix did this for a fan site)? No. It was some indy dev sleeping with someone for a review that doesn't exist. But rather than having shifted their focus to big publishers, they instead whine and moan about how journalists write reviews for their audience that wants video games to be more inclusive, and diverse.
apparantly there is a GamerGate movie, trailer here : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5j2F4VcBmeo
But what if telling people what kind of a person some asshole is, results in such a massive wave of harassment directed at that person that some people start blaming the victim who told people about it of intentionally inciting that harassment, resulting in the victim getting fired and gagged by court order to prevent further harassment, while public opinion gets divided in such a manner that everyone starts harassing the other group of harassers, finally resulting in a large scale political harassment shitflinging battle where neither side cares about the victim and the victim is effectively silenced completely?
Totally hypothetical scenario, of course.
Eh, that's a bit of a grey area there. I found myself a bit disagreeing with what Sarkeesian said in some of her videos. It wasn't factually wrong, but it was presented in a way that felt a bit unfair to the particular games.
The Hitman: Absolution thing, for example. She talks about misogynistic behaviour that is player-directed and implicitly encouraged, showing footage from Hitman: Absolution. I find that an odd choice to show, because killing bystanders in Hitman is explicitly discouraged by reducing the score and reward. And the way she presents it implies that Hitman encourages you to kill or harm women specifically, when in reality you're absolutely not encouraged to do so. Especially when killing or knocking out women in Hitman practically never gives advantages because you won't get a new disguise (except for one scene where you have to throw down the body of a woman down a balkony or so to distract guards. And yes, the scene is bullshit and should not be in a Hitman game and should rightfully be criticised). So, dunno, it just feels a bit unfair.
Same with Deus Ex: Human Revolution, where she talks about the prostitutes in China and how they're just exotic background decoration, when you actually do get a few quests from them where you can help some of the prostitutes. It's not much, but presenting them as just background decorations meant for the visual pleasure of teenage boys... Again, just a bit unfair. Deus Ex: HR also draws heavily from Cyberpunk, and widespread prostitution is an important stylistic element of that, in a way. Same with the prostitutes she criticised in Tunnel Rats, which were a direct reference to Full Metal Jacket. Or Fallout: New Vegas, which she also used as an example for women as background decorations, especially the prostitutes on the Strip. Here you can also have some important interaction with some of them and solve quests and help them.
Again, she's not actually wrong about how the hookers on the streets are background decoration, but the way she presents it implies that they're some sort of special background decoration different from all the other background characters you can't really talk to. That there's some sort of misogynist intent by the developer behind it all, when there really isn't. They're part of the flair of the Strip, and yes, they're background decoration, but so is every other character walking on the Strip. It just feels like Sarkeesian implies more misogynist intent than there actually is, that's all. Which felt especially unfair to Fallout: New Vegas, when it had some of the best written and most diverse characters in a very long while.
TL;DR: She's not really wrong or misleading, but her choices are somehwat odd and just feel a bit unfair to the games, which is why people flipped their shit about it.
Last edited:
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
You see what you want to see, of course.
The Zoe Quinn incident was what set of the shitstorm only because it was the first time gamers had hard evidence. With doritogate et al gamers had no leverage. It's also unfortunate but true that indie devs are easier targets. You can't expect regular gamers, with 0 support, to make any kind of dent in big publishers. Even with evidence it's been an uphill struggle.
So this years-old gameplay mechanic used on male characters isn't noteworthy but change the gender and somehow it is?
Don't know anything about the scene, but I dunno. . seems kind of sexist of you. :^)
Last edited:
People could stop buying those AAA games everyone complains about anyway.
Instead they focused their efforts on cheap or even free indie games.
Instead they focused their efforts on cheap or even free indie games.
Last edited:
Akratus
Bleep bloop.
And yet there's a new CoD every damn year. Good job there, champs.
/edit: And yeeees, I'm aware what it was really about. We still get broken ports all the time, and what the hell are talking about MW2 now when it doesn't have anything to do with Gamergate?
/edit: And yeeees, I'm aware what it was really about. We still get broken ports all the time, and what the hell are talking about MW2 now when it doesn't have anything to do with Gamergate?
Last edited:
That's why you have to weigh potential harm (five months of, well, this) vs. potential prevention of harm (people know/can decide whether Zoe Quinn is an emotional abuser).PlanHex said:
Eron Gjoni is a pretty shit example because he did actually encourage and cultivate the hate mob, though.
Right, but her being potentially unfair to some games is a really far cry from the OMG SHE'S A LIAR AND CON ARTIST shit we see everywhere, where Hitman: Absolution is basically the only example of her "lying" they come up with.Hassknecht said:
lol hard evidence. It was total horseshit you idiot. Five seconds of googling that 'evidence' would've told you all it was nonsense because there was no review, ever. GamerGate started because you fucktards are gullible as shit and believed whatever InternetAristocrat and company told you.Akratus said:
I mean, even the entire premise of the thing was fucked. The multi-billion dollar gaming industry is corrupt because a free indie game got a positive review? Get the fuck out.
Yes please do.Akratus said:
____
GamerGate is so stupid Polygon actually has to explain what "opinion" means.
T
TorontoReign
Guest
Well...that is how I would have put it.
Yes. That's not remotely how GamerGate puts it, though.