This is wrong, my gaming computer is broken, but I believe you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Printable View
This is wrong, my gaming computer is broken, but I believe you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Ah, I didnt know, steam put you on the "you have # friends who play hitman absolution" and I assumed.
Depends on the store, some of them have storekeeps that are armed and will shoot you in the back if you let them live after you rob them, others just call the police, it varies like in real life. I dont know if there are armed prostitutes but I wouldnt be adverse to the idea of having some of them armed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Violent fantasy causing violence and sexist fantasy causing sexism; both run under the assumption that the average human is incapable of observing or interacting with something they know is not real without being influenced by it and I find the implication both wrong and somewhat insulting to my intelligence.Quote:
That's violence. Which has quite a different mechanisms to follow. Media is one information source and not the strongest one (friends and family are). The problem occurs when it's persistent and aren't balanced by other sources. Do you consider that you're close to reality to determine the odds of car explosions? I don't know if the UK got something similar, but the American dream is almost entirely media driven.
I can see the argument for children not being exposed to these things: that children are less capable of distinguishing between fantasy and reality (that's why I stopped railing against age ratings when I exceeded them) but there has to be a point where we stop treating people as gullible children. Censoring things that are clearly marketed towards adults is going too far under a false pretense.
Now, if the feminist movment's message was: we need more alternatives to the stupid male fantasies of nubile women and powerful men then I think you would get more people agreeing with you, bring on the male strippers and the practically armoured warrior women.
However my observations of the movment from the outside is that feminism just wants to get rid of these fantasies altogether. That is not only impractical it is absolutely abhorrent.
If that observation is incorrect then I think the people running it need to seriously consider why those outside are getting the wrong idea and rework thier image to fix that. They can start by fact checking thier points and toning down or eliminating the rhetoric. Oh and ditch sarkeesian's feminist frequency. Actually ditch sarkeesian altogether, her actions will hang like an albatross on feminism's neck for years and I dont see it being worth the effort to salvage her credibility.
Side note: I also would agree that we should stop producing games that are actually maliciously sexist. The thing is that these games are few and far between to begin with. (hell, the last mainstream game that I remember actually being such is duke nukem forever, and that was a massive flop.)
The impression I get is that feminists are lumping the stupid male fantasies in with the outright attacks on women, for whatever reason. They need to stop doing that or they'll get nowhere.
Who are "thew people running it"? You say that as though feminism were an organization with a clearly defined leadership.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
And this accusation could just as well be brought up against the ones who claim males are the bigger victims.
You mean they aren't?..Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
...Well. You guys, or gals or whatever, you might want to get onto that, 'cause right now any random idiot can claim/be claimed to speak for you. I mean look at sarkeesian, yeesh.
There's gotta be someone who can play MLK jr to her Lil' wayne, right?
This person seems like a good candidate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w
Yep.Quote:
And this accusation could just as well be brought up against the ones who claim males are the bigger victims.
...What? Just because I think one side is right on a few things doesn't mean I also think they are well organised. Someone should tell Sargon to cut that crap out, shape up man, anyone could think you are an accurate representation of the entire group or something.
This is literally like reading Reddit.
Now you're bringing in those gender stereotypes that tell men to behave in a certain way or they aren't real men...Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
wow I never thought we would see a thread like this here but seems I was wrong.
A few points which seem to be glazed over entirely - lets start with Hitman.
In previous games (the better ones) Penalties for killing civilians remained and in fact you were incentivised to only kill your targets in a lot of ways - this was all thrown out the window in Absolution.
Yes you are penalized with a negative score for killing civilians BUT by simply hiding the bodies the penalty is negated and your score is "refunded" - so unlike previous games where the penalty was permanent and thus disincentivized killing civilians, Absolution does the opposite - it encourages you to kill as long as you clean up after yourself.
This directly leads into Sarkeesian's point - the strippers on this level are simply there to be window dressing - for the player to observe or "play" with as they see fit - they serve no point to the plot other than to set up the whole "the boss is a bad guy" by over hearing their conversation. Actually I would go further and slate the entire mission - it served no point to the plot other than as a "ooo look how gritty we are we have a strip club mission" and was frankly a pointless grind (much like the entire game tbh).
Id also like to bring up Sarkeesian's stated motivations since ole Jack Thompson has been brought up - unlike Jack she isn't calling for a ban on games or for plots to be radically altered - she in fact states at the start of every video that using them as examples does not make them bad games or make them unenjoyable - she is simply highlighting sexist tropes and encouraging writers to produce better written plots - something most gamers should get behind because there has been a MASSIVE decline in the quality of plots in games and they are starting to get so cliched its laughable - any improvement would be VERY welcome.
---edit---
Oh and another point on Jack Thompson - he is an open supporter of GG and opponent of Sarkeesian... yeah... that one shocked me considering how much hate was thrown at him back in the day by Gamers everywhere...
frankly I am surprised how long we lasted myself. At least it hasnt turned into another ukraine thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Moody
No.Quote:
A few points which seem to be glazed over entirely - lets start with Hitman.
In previous games (the better ones) Penalties for killing civilians remained and in fact you were incentivised to only kill your targets in a lot of ways - this was all thrown out the window in Absolution.
Yes you are penalized with a negative score for killing civilians BUT by simply hiding the bodies the penalty is negated and your score is "refunded" - so unlike previous games where the penalty was permanent and thus disincentivized killing civilians, Absolution does the opposite - it encourages you to kill as long as you clean up after yourself.
You do get a refund but that refund is 150.
http://cloud-4.steamusercontent.com/...553B0F6DCF624/
150. Out of 4,000. Nowhere near enough to cover civilian deaths.
As for the rest of your points, see post #62.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rqz--Rf6IIo&t=55sQuote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Wow, he has aged really well. I hope I look that good at 50.
Greyblades, linky for you for a test. Well for everyone. Go through them one by one. Question in the end.
http://eu.battle.net/overwatch/en/
Seen the twitter feed summary I linked? Let just say that any decent criticism would be drowned out by harassment by the thousands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
The latex nuns are another trope. The Sexy Villainess. Of course they wouldn't show up in women as background decoration.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
So prostitutes are the easiest one to murder/rob. No incentives there. Your suggestion could certainly be one solution, but it would never been suggested unless someone said, "hey wait a minute".Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
The position is mostly to make the public aware of it, reduce some of it and very importantly diversify. It's the prevalence of several tropes that are the problem, not that they exist. And the casual sexism. Or the importance of male gaze butt shots, while saving the galaxy (ME2). They got their place, but they do seem to spread to thing not relevant for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
The thing is that:
is both read and even more, actively spun as promoting censorship, that needs to be silenced, because it will have so totally massive influence otherwise.Quote:
This series will include critical analysis of many beloved games and characters, but remember that it is both possible (and even necessary) to simultaneously enjoy media while also being critical of it’s more problematic or pernicious aspects.
A critique will be critic about the work, that's sort of the point and also what she got the original crowd funding for.
I mean I do get feeling that criticism in this case mean a little criticism and a lot of apologising for giving it for it to feel fair. It's the "here's 30 examples of it, and it's the amount of it, while each individual example can be justified, as a trend it's disturbing".
YOU LIAR, you uses this example wrong, it's totally justified thus you're totally wrong on everything.
Yeah, they are rare. Duke Nukem Forever got less of (both malicious and normal) sexism than Red Dead Redemption and GTAV btw. Most games with sexism are casually sexist. Now the really interesting part, why are they casually sexist (like strippers and prostitutes being quite common)? If this is true:Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Then it would mean that most of the game industry are driven by casually sexist agenda. Or maybe they picked it up more or less subconsciously, like most culture perceptions are picked up. Violence on the other hand is not a subconscious act. Shooting strippers in a game aren't going to make one shoot strippers in real life, but are you entirely sure that it'll keep your normal position about them entirely the same?Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
In particular if your contact with them will be only those games and maybe one night out, where you certainly did not spend thinking about what they do on their spare time (well one possible exception, involving "afterwork" related activities).
Are you serious or not? :inquisitive: I mean, she's a GG apologist (who shown massive, massive misogyny, dribbled into racism, been major jerks and basically shown all the wrong things about gamer culture), who proudly start out with saying that she haven't played any video games regularly ever and haven't played any game for decades. Diversity is increasing. Equality is comming. Look here's an example from 2009 (ffxiii) and 2008 (mirror's edge), (I can't pick the other examples from, so none are top fame, even if the might be pearls). And here's the classic from 2003 (Beyond Good and Evil). I mean, at least pick Tomb Raider reboot (2013).Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
And the question following the link on top.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
You stereotype a group of people (gamers) for 20 years as misunderstood, nerdy, angry, white males and then suddenly it is shocking to find out that's what they have become.
What's ironic is that the sub-culture of fighting games has possibly the largest amount of diversity by far (in terms of race), and yet it is also one of the most sexist sub-cultures. So of course, we just won't mention them.
Also, video games do have shittier writing. And yes, they are sexist.
That's the internet, to get to the good bits you have to dig through the rubble of GIFT. If she didnt want to deal with that she could just not have read them, but by disabling the comments she didnt even give anyone else a chance to dig and find the valid critiscisms. Whether or not that was the intent is impossible for us to determine but the effect was that she gave the impression that she wouldnt risk allowing any criticism on the same page as her video in case they proved her wrong and/or dishonest. Which as I have exhibited she was.Quote:
Seen the twitter feed summary I linked? Let just say that any decent criticism would be drowned out by harassment by the thousands.
The point I was making is that she had an actual argument that the game exhibited actual tones of sexism, yet she still felt the need to lie.Quote:
The latex nuns are another trope. The Sexy Villainess. Of course they wouldn't show up in women as background decoration.
This person is not competent enough to be worth defending. Feminists need to find someone else to champion, one who doesnt lie.
Indeed, I conceed the point that it is incentivising in the game.Quote:
So prostitutes are the easiest one to murder/rob. No incentives there. Your suggestion could certainly be one solution, but it would never been suggested unless someone said, "hey wait a minute".
However as I said in #62 I reject the implication that such an incentivisation could significantly affect the real life attitude and behavior of the average adult.
There are children who would be affected, there are mentally ill people who would be affected, but society has already made it so that neither can get access to such media without intervention, or lack of it, by a sane adult.
Also my main argument stays the same: sarkeesian did a terrible job at it and should be replaced in the eyes of the media by someone who doesnt lie and is less obvious and abrasive in thier agenda.
Correction: YOU LIAR, this example has been shown to be the opposite of what you said it was, It's totally justified thus that your argument cannot be considered unbiased and the truth of your other points cannot be assumed.Quote:
The position is mostly to make the public aware of it, reduce some of it and very importantly diversify. It's the prevalence of several tropes that are the problem, not that they exist. And the casual sexism. Or the importance of male gaze butt shots, while saving the galaxy (ME2). They got their place, but they do seem to spread to thing not relevant for them.
The thing is that:
is both read and even more, actively spun as promoting censorship, that needs to be silenced, because it will have so totally massive influence otherwise.
A critique will be critic about the work, that's sort of the point and also what she got the original crowd funding for.
I mean I do get feeling that criticism in this case mean a little criticism and a lot of apologising for giving it for it to feel fair. It's the "here's 30 examples of it, and it's the amount of it, while each individual example can be justified, as a trend it's disturbing".
YOU LIAR, you uses this example wrong, it's totally justified thus you're totally wrong on everything.
It does not matter if everything else is the purest truth, this one lie made in ill faith was enough to for gamers to dismiss her as lying, crazy or both. As you said:
Sarkeesian's video did the exact opposite: it served to reduce and discredit that which you wish to make people aware. it's tone put viewing gamers on the defensive and it's lies gave it's detractors more ammunition than a thousand 4chan trolls.l so in the end she just hardened gaming to her ideas.Quote:
The position is mostly to make the public aware of it, reduce some of it and very importantly diversify.
She set back your position, I argue that there should be a sane alternative to her, and that sane alternative must be sèn to call it's own followers out on thier behavior.
At the time I was under the impression that it was femenism that was driven by a casually sexist agenda, all that talk of leaders and such.Quote:
Yeah, they are rare. Most games with sexism are casually sexist. Now the really interesting part, why are they casually sexist (like strippers and prostitutes being quite common)? If this is true:
Then it would mean that most of the game industry are driven by casually sexist agenda. Or maybe they picked it up more or less subconsciously, like most culture perceptions are picked up. Violence on the other hand is not a subconscious act. Shooting strippers in a game aren't going to make one shoot strippers in real life, but are you entirely sure that it'll keep your normal position about them entirely the same?
In particular if your contact with them will be only those games and maybe one night out, where you certainly did not spend thinking about what they do on their spare time (well one possible exception, involving "afterwork" related activities).
Now I find myself realizing (or at least thinking along the lines of, seing as the word "realizing" indicates the new viewpoint is true and I dont know if it is) that I was focusing upon a vocal minority. The issue now is that this vocal minority needs to be supplanted by the sane side of the movment. I am arguing that sarkeesian is most certainly not the one to do it.
Deadly. Unlike sarkeesian, it's already proven that gamers are actually willing to listen to what she says, She may sound like she says what we want to hear but she is listened to because she talks to us, not at us and that is more than can be said for most of the anti gamergate dreck.Quote:
Are you serious or not? :inquisitive:
Ah gamer gate, what a mess. A fight over journalistic integrity that turned into a storm when neither side could keep thier crazies in line.Quote:
I mean, she's a GG apologist (who shown massive, massive misogyny, dribbled into racism, been major jerks and basically shown all the wrong things about gamer culture),
Remember when I mentioned I mistook your vocal minority for leadership? It was because my opinion on the performance of social movments came from observing that particular mess.
Anti gg had leadership gg didnt and it showed, the gamers were unable to maintain a united front so when the journalists smeared their accusers there wasn't anyone who could renounce them. In the mean time Both sides flung videos articles and tweets at eachother but too many times were they made not to persuade the enemy but to make thier side feel better about themselves. Protect your own over all else seems to be the motto these days.
I do not believe that gamerGate is only an issue with gamer culture, i think it's an issue of culture in general just amplified by GIFT. Death threats were claimed on both sides, not just Anti. The racists, sexists and jerks of all varieties scream behind thier anonymity at every provocation and the internet is full of trolls who love to poke them into a frenzy for giggles.
Both sides let their vocal minority speak unchallenged by thier peers, now neither side wants anything to do with eachother. republicans and democrats, socialists and capitalists, and now GG and anti GG, they all hate eachother because the sane cant or wont correct their stupid.
As for being an apologist as you call her. It is exaxtly that which wiĺl mean when she points out sexism in games she won't be written off as yet another "femenazi"
Not much of a step down from sarkeesian:Quote:
who proudly start out with saying that she haven't played any video games regularly ever and haven't played any game for decades.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Afgtd8ZsXzI
Consider that there are estimated 5 million individual video games currently in existance. In the face of so many there is little difference between her amount and sarkeesian's.Quote:
Diversity is increasing. Equality is comming. Look here's an example from 2009 (ffxiii) and 2008 (mirror's edge), (I can't pick the other examples from, so none are top fame, even if the might be pearls). And here's the classic from 2003 (Beyond Good and Evil). I mean, at least pick Tomb Raider reboot (2013).
Then you are a funny person because all noticed was a feeling of deja-vu before I realized I had seen that bodybuilder woman before circling the escher girls tumblr. An example of a women in a game done right, I believe.Quote:
And the question following the link on top.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
This thread needs more inspiring philosophy (no offense intended).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPBe09g3ALw
I'd like to retract this statment. I've been distracted recently with the death throes of a worthless university course and didnt give it much thought.Quote:
Indeed, I conceed the point that it is incentivising in the game.Quote:
So prostitutes are the easiest one to murder/rob. No incentives there. Your suggestion could certainly be one solution, but it would never been suggested unless someone said, "hey wait a minute".
No, the prostitutes are not incentivised, they are not the best method of regaining health.
Firstly the process of getting a prostitute is so inconvenient so as to make any material benefit pointless. The women only show up in certain areas, they only appear at night and they wont interact with the player unless he is out of combat and doesnt have a wanted level, which in that case they might as well just go eat something and not waste the time tracking down one and waiting the 1 minute of the animations to end.
There's not even a point in saving money robbing them as food items rarely cost more than 5 ingame dollars. Regardless of it being easier to directly regain the losses from a prostitute than a convinient store, the cost of the game's legal method of health replenishment is so little that by any measure prostitutes are the less appealing option because there's never going to be a time when a player is going to be in the position where he both cant afford to buy food and yet still have the $25 to initiate relations with a prostitute.
Heck, if a player needs cash for food, he could just mug an npc, it's easier to do that than killing a prostitute or robbing a store, you dont even need to kill them, just point your weapon at them until they drop the cash and run. There is no ingame incentive to killing a prostitute.
The noise to signal ratio would be way, way worse than normal youtube comments (which are quite bad). The harassment is a real and possible the most significant factor that influences everything when it comes to this. That's how Sarkeesian ended up publicly known. That's why no other woman does it. That's partially why there's low criticism against her (the other reason would be that it's mostly related to details and packaging, not core points).Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Big quote incoming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Why I'm posting the big quotes is because if you read the position she takes with it, the Hitman comment is no lie. Personally, I'm I'm not embracing it, but it has a point.
She probably picked it because it's one of the few games were you can and are rewarded to mess around with the body.
For some gamers, yes. For game developers? No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Any sane alternative will face an harassment campaign from a certain sexist gamer subculture. That's the sad fundamental rule, which drives the whole thing. She's the leading face because she has endured it (and it has kicked her upwards) and that her message isn't controversial among feminists. There's some details that are off, but denunciation and then repeating the same message in a different package?Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Also, may I remind you that you reject that continuous sexist messages in game would have any influence at all? That's sort of a baseline here, so any feminist talking about game will smash into that one.
You can do it nicer than what Sarkeesian does (she uses overwhelming and hammering in techniques), but you can't advocate change with that soft approach. You might be able to do a two step version, one step to give it notice and the second to give criticism, butQuote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Nah, GG is way worse than that. It originated from a disgruntled boyfriend who implied that indie game developer Zoe Quinn had slept around with game reporters. This evolved into Ethics in Journalism, since she obviously slept around for better game reviews (The Quinnspiracy, later renamed Gamergate). A clear case of significant and problematic corruption. The obvious solution to this problem was to harass Zoe Quinn (and not the reporter she actually slept with). A bunch of game journalists did collection pieces on on that gamer harassment culture and gamers now start to include everyone (That's the point of the "Gamers are dead article"). And it exploded. Mixing is up, Sarkeesian got her latest video out at somewhere around here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
That harassment core never went away, but did end up banned from 4chan. And continued it on 8chan. That's the closest thing to leadership gg had. None wanted to take responsibility, but the tactics came from there. It's hard to be secret when your secret group are in public threads.
GG never found people wanting to take responsibility for an harassment campaign, with a thin patina of legitimacy. That's why actual Ethics of Game Journalism never gained momentum or focus. It had way more about increasing corruption in game journalism rather than the opposite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
It's interwoven. GG got lots of its style from 4chan, and a lot of it was territorial defense. But the harassment core was a bit too dedicated to be called trolls.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Nope, that comes with the territory. Daring to give any sniff of criticism would set it off. GG was pretty good at harassing away female GG supporters, because they were female.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Her pacifism streak and her tendency to say that it is a feminine value haven't showed up yet. If she brings it up, that probably one place were the feminists will give her a lot more criticism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
She played as a child, had a break for a decade or something, then came back and started to play and noted the issues the games have.
The thing is that there's so many new major titles coming out and so few with a female main character. If your point is that diversity is increasing, then taking the old classic cases aren't proving your point. Rather the opposite. "I couldn't find any new examples, so here are the old ones that exist, proving this new trend".Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
I didn't have any previous encounter and got a "that's alot of girls characters" response. It wasn't hostile, but it was clear that the back on my brain did not consider that a norm in this situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Overwatch in general are doing pretty good actually. Only big complaints were lack of variation of female body types (which that bodybuilder woman fixes) and widow maker (both backstory and presentation). And she passes due to the existence of variation. Proud Blizzard daddy not being able to proudly present any Blizzard game for his daughter was a major drive btw.
Which is sort of telling.
I've spent the last day or so enjoying not having to worry about another essay on the horison and have been browsing the /gamergatehq/ tab on 8chan, it's surprising how badly I was mistaken about them.
Purposefully avoiding a heirachy to avoid someone coopting the message for thier own ends with the side effect of being immune to individual harrassment, how they've taken thier bad reputation and used it as a shield, man did I get it wrong. There's a scandal brewing right now about a calgary expo and seeing how they respond is fascinating.
Harassment is real, it's not nearly omnidirectional towards femenists, or anti-gg for that matter, but it's real. Doesnt make her refual to allow comments less detrimental to her image.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Mess around? You're rewarded for it's disposal with no regard for how much you exploit the game's physics for sexual jollies. Add to that the reward being so low as to be nigh irrelevant I fail to see how: "players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual female characters" is any less of a lie.Quote:
Why I'm posting the big quotes is because if you read the position she takes with it, the Hitman comment is no lie. Personally, I'm I'm not embracing it, but it has a point.
She probably picked it because it's one of the few games were you can and are rewarded to mess around with the body.
So? It just means other people wanting to make a buck will come along and fill the holes your converting those developers left. There's a demand, a very big one, and unless you lessen that demand converting the providers in a free market is a wasted effort and sarkeesian is counter productive to lessening said demand.Quote:
For some gamers, yes. For game developers? No.
And if they cant persuade thier way through that wall they will lose. See here's the thing: I'm not on your side, I could have been but that ship sailed a week ago. What I'm doing here isnt trying to explain why you are wrong in your beliefs, I am trying to explain how you are failing to convince me and others like me.Quote:
Any sane alternative will face an harassment campaign from a certain sexist gamer subculture. That's the sad fundamental rule, which drives the whole thing.She's the leading face because she has endured it (and it has kicked her upwards) and that her message isn't controversial among feminists. There's some details that are off, but denunciation and then repeating the same message in a different package?
Also, may I remind you that you reject that continuous sexist messages in game would have any influence at all? That's sort of a baseline here, so any feminist talking about game will smash into that one.
The big part is not being able to get past the trolls, if you cant take the slings and arrows of he internet you wont reach enough people to matter and you may as well give up. The second biggest part is the moral highground, stumbling at the trolls is detrimental but going to thier level is fatal. Letting yourself be represented by a unrepentant liar will lose you followers not gain you.
Someone hasn't been studying the greats. I reccomend you look up how Ghandi, Mandela and King won change, it wasnt by letting lies and slander be spoken in thier name unchallenged.Quote:
You can do it nicer than what Sarkeesian does (she uses overwhelming and hammering in techniques), but you can't advocate change with that soft approach.
Interesting, I was curious how the other side explained it.Quote:
Nah, GG is way worse than that. It originated from a disgruntled boyfriend who implied that indie game developer Zoe Quinn had slept around with game reporters. This evolved into Ethics in Journalism, since she obviously slept around for better game reviews (The Quinnspiracy, later renamed Gamergate). A clear case of significant and problematic corruption. The obvious solution to this problem was to harass Zoe Quinn (and not the reporter she actually slept with). A bunch of game journalists did collection pieces on on that gamer harassment culture and gamers now start to include everyone (That's the point of the "Gamers are dead article"). And it exploded. Mixing is up, Sarkeesian got her latest video out at somewhere around here.
That harassment core never went away, but did end up banned from 4chan. And continued it on 8chan. That's the closest thing to leadership gg had. None wanted to take responsibility, but the tactics came from there. It's hard to be secret when your secret group are in public threads.
Your opponants record a copyright takedown by ms quinn against a person who had commented on the boyfriend's allegations.
This wasnt unusual. Such takedowns against reviewers by disgruntled devs are common and, usually, shown as tantrums for bad reviews. Regardless of the intent the takedown gained attention(at this point the name gamergate was coined by Adam Baldwin). That attention uncovered a Polygon editor Ben Kuchera who had been paying into ms quinns patreon account, Mr Kuchera had been paying for several weeks before he wrote an article on Quinn's game depression quest. He failed to mention such in the article.
When journalists promote someone's product and fail to mention a previous relationship there will inevitably arise questions of intergrity, is this journalist review objective or is he coloured by affection? It doenst matter if it is sexual or platonic such relationships will colour opinion and reduce objectivity, for this reason the public expects journalists to at the very least to mention a prior relationship with the people they write on.
Ben Kuchera did not.
Further digging produced similar instances, Patricia Hernandez, Robin Arnott and others suspected of such relations with game devs. At first the reaction was reasonable; polygon and kotaku announced changes to thier codes of ethics, Kotaku to ban patreon payments between thier journalists and game devs, and polygon to always announce previous relations. People weren't exactly satisfied with this but it was a step in the right direction.
Then this happened: http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...20/941/a84.jpg A series of articles decrying gamers all on the same day. Thus was the Anti-gamergate movment started, with gaming journalists lashing out at gamers right as thier credibility was under scrutiny.
That is how the Gamergate proponants record how the gamergate fiasco started. You can see for yourself this is thier narrative and if anti-gamergate was working optimally it would be attacking that, challenging the points, the evidence collected etc, trying to disprove the accusation of collusions.
Instead it is pointing at the trolls and the fools and going "look how awful gamers are" while ignoring the rational arguers. I think that is less a strategy and more a stopgap measure, but it might have worked if anti gamergate could keep the moral highground, be seen as the mature party.
Language warning:
Alas, they are showing again and again they cant.
That's why they will lose if they dont change. When gamers do things like this noone cares, it's expected and they dont have a reputation to lose, but when those who decry them for it start doing it themselves they show themselves as hypocrites. Worse would be if, as has been claimed, they are truly doing it on purpose as irony, that would mean they are giving things for those gamers you decry to throw it in Anti-GG's face for a cheap laugh.
There is no audience left anymore that hasnt already heard everything in the book applied to gamers. Smearing doesn't hurt anymore and if Anti-GG keep trying it will keep backfireing.
As far as I can see the only way forward for Anti GG is to change tactics and start converting the enemy, and they dont seem to want to.
Greyblades, have you seriously expended pages on GamerGate.
dude - seriously - go out and meet some actual female gamers. There was literally no "scandal" the whole thing was completely manufactured, by a jealous ex-boyfriend if memory serves. You need an online life outside the Backroom if you think the suggestion that an Indy dev sleeping with a journalist for good reviews is news when EA, SEGA, Zenimax etc. just PAY for good reviews with gifts etc.
The suggestion that GamerGate has no "leadership" is a steaming pile of shit as well, people said that about Anonymous but the fact was it was the Lulzsec crew running everything and manipulating useful fools on 4Chan to download their botnet clients.
Prove it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
That's all that needed to be done, all anti-GG needed to do was restrain the bashing and shaming and prove the allegations were all wrong.
Had they done that from the start, let someone look into thier buisness and root out any collusion this could have all blown over, but no.
Look, if you want this specific conversation to end stop responding, I'm not likely to stop from disinterest anytime soon; not only because I have been winning thus far with the hitman thing, but I feel like I am learning a lot from this.
But if you want gamergate to go away, prove it's nothing. I sincerely wish you good luck, but expect little now that 8 months has passed and with all the deletions the original event has become impossible to prove either way.
So? Just because someone else is doing worse doesnt mean that this wrong gets a free pass.Quote:
You need an online life outside the Backroom if you think the suggestion that an Indy dev sleeping with a journalist for good reviews is news when EA, SEGA, Zenimax etc. just PAY for good reviews with gifts etc.
God knows I wouldnt be doing this if (like EA, SEGA and Zenimax) Anti-GG didn't have people willing to argue in thier defense on the Org. And unlike those companies these arguments wont dissapear with everyone giving up once the uncaring, unoticing and unassailable nature of a multi million corporation becomes apparant.
So? This is a media war not a hacking one. GamerGate couldn't be done with botnet clients and the ways they've been fighting hasnt been terrorism.Quote:
The suggestion that GamerGate has no "leadership" is a steaming pile of shit as well, people said that about Anonymous but the fact was it was the Lulzsec crew running everything and manipulating useful fools on 4Chan to download their botnet clients.
You know the major way that gamergate fights right now? By recording what the important people in AntiGG says and showing them to their sponsering companies in the hopes that these advertisers will pull funding due to bad press, and it's been working.
See that's why I dont think GG will lose if things keep going on as they have been; GG has weaponized their opponants own capacity for being offensive.
The rules of engagment are legal and on the internet right now, free for all to see. GG doesn't rely on debators, pundits and journalists like Anti does, anyone can do the work and it wont end if a couple of people are arrested or censored.
Also, useful fools? Both sides have been accusing eachother of that since the beginning, it's become rather meaningless in this case.
Ex-Boyfriend says "she's a slut who slept with loads of journo's for good reviews" and she's expected to prove she didn't do it? That's 4Chan logic for you.
Do you know anything about Watergate? It was a scandal where people were caught, not where someone threw mud and then tried to make it stick with threats and character assassination.
GamerGate is about misogynist pigs, and stupidity.
Let's take a look at the Zoe Quinn thing, shall we, starting with the fact that here new boyfriend, the journalist, (not a random hookup) NEVER reviewed the game in question. Her Ex was just a jerk, as exes often are. You may not know this, but a prime reason that women break up with men is because they're arse holes.
As to the whole "legal" thing, well, doxing, hacking and rape/death threats are not legal.
The question over whether Anita Sarkeesian was a "real gamer" wasn't entirely baseless, but is someone starts a kickstarter to bug consoles and games that implies they don't already have their own gear, doesn't it? As to her points, well, limited value to be honest, but the backlash against her was largely perpetrated by people who just want more titties in games.
Now, let's be clear here, this is a general problem with media today, you only have to watch Game of Thrones to see that a lot of big budget mass-media is directed to hook the lowest common denominator, and GoT is really just a mix of softcore porn and soap opera now, which is not a terrible thing but the big budget doesn't make it a big piece of art.
A final thought for you, the original "Quinspiracy" is pretty much the plot of a 90's Playboy/Skinemax softcore porno, without the final denouncement where the seductress (Quinn) is finally caught out and gets bad reviews for the game.
Only thing about the Quinn-Conspiracy worth any salt was the bust-up with The Fine Young Capitalists, from all appearances.
*cracks fingers*
I can see how that would be an impossible task, good thing that was not what I was referring to: Prove that Nathan grayson wasnt in a relationship with zoe quinn before or during the writing of this article, or prove that he clearly stated his relationship in said article.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
If either of those was proven at the start and maybe gamergate would still be the petty internet drama Anti GG want you to think it is. Alas it remained ambiguous long enough for the investigations of the internet to uncover more instances like it and now you have a whole list of suspected collaberations between journalists and developers to disprove if you want it to go away.
Hey Husar, remember when I told you this:
Take out the insults on language, add in a dose of swearing and misrepresentation, intentional or otherwise. With that I give you exhibit A:Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
To give him credit the rest is somewhat less counterproductive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
I assume you meant to say buy and not bug. To be new to the scene is not an issue, it's that she made a false claim on a game she herself apparantly played and not admit to it when caught that encompasses the main problem with her, makes the audience think she's full of it.Quote:
The question over whether Anita Sarkeesian was a "real gamer" wasn't entirely baseless, but is someone starts a kickstarter to bug consoles and games that implies they don't already have their own gear, doesn't it?
I think she is but that's a matter of opinion.
Dude, dont generalize, whether or not that appraisal is true makes no difference to the situation she created.Quote:
As to her points, well, limited value to be honest, but the backlash against her was largely perpetrated by people who just want more titties in games.
I dont care about it being art, I care that someone is calling for change in an entire industry over petty social politics and using underhanded tactics to make it happen.Quote:
Now, let's be clear here, this is a general problem with media today, you only have to watch Game of Thrones to see that a lot of big budget mass-media is directed to hook the lowest common denominator, and GoT is really just a mix of softcore porn and soap opera now, which is not a terrible thing but the big budget doesn't make it a big piece of art.
As much as the Anti's like to use the term in irony, a lot of GG is actually about gamer ethics. Notice that those attacking GG rarely want to actually address it, either to confirm or deny such occurances. Using deflection to steer the conversation away, sometimes arguing the relevance but never arguing the content.Quote:
A final thought for you, the original "Quinspiracy" is pretty much the plot of a 90's Playboy/Skinemax softcore porno, without the final denouncement where the seductress (Quinn) is finally caught out and gets bad reviews for the game
Both sides do it, I dare say every side in every controvertial political debate does, but the anti side is the one that wants everyone to think it upright and good while GG are a bunch of uncooth thugs, yet they keep going to thier opponants level again and again and again.
If I may, who do you hear your information about GamerGate from?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
It sort of adopting the tactics and not getting the point of it. Get in through a lie, then go in with active derailment tactics. That's sort a check list on how to get banned from that type of expo. Then claim victory to show the evil and hypocrisy of their opponents. It was a funded kickstarter with that specific purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
The edge of harassment is towards feminists. It heavily outnumber the average harassment noise. It's underlying the entire conversation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Disabling comments one of the things that get mostly ignored, unless you have an axe to grind.
Mess around= Move around in this case. Makes a stronger visual imagery.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
It is drawn from a specific narrative. You can reject that narrative and thus rejecting the point it would make (making it incorrect in your mind), but from that narrative it's not a lie. The combined work of the game developers put it in there for a reason.
It would diversify the market. Some games would have more. Most less. That would be a good thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Getting only trolls would be a vast improvement. That is of an issue. When the trolls have upgraded to harassers (who don't disappear by being ignored) and there's no system to take care of them, what do you do then? Let them win of course. That won't ever become a problem later on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
I suspect the new Positive Female Characters is a response to that. Since the focus are mostly on positive things, it's way less aggressive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
IIRC Ben's article was basically that here's some indie games that you can find to be interesting. I might be mixing him up with Grayson on that though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
It's worth remembering that at this point, something like 99% of the active harassment is still towards Zoe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Schreier from Kotaku in the comments
It's sort of hard to prove that you don't have a collusion, from someone that wants you to have one, when you're open with that you are in contact with them and do a theme piece. The summary, consisting of two things, if you read the articles is that the gamer is becoming dead the same way a movier is. When everyone does it, it's no longer an identifier,even if some people are more into it than others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
The second and more important part is the massive criticism of an active harassment campaign. Not trolling, major harassment way beyond the regular internet trolling noise. That got the explosion.
The narrative that's pushed that you ignore and that the entire world notices are the massive harassment, way, way beyond trolling. There's a reason why GG got kicked out of 4chan and why the official GG supporters are almost entirely consisting of people with hateful and dubious reputation.
It gets ignored into trolls will be trolls and thus it "disappears".
"Why do you find those guys evil?"
"They kidnap children and eat them."
"Psh, boys will be boys. Show me something bad about them."
That is a an example of disorganisation (since anti GG isn't exactly a movement as such) and the internet. Some degree of trolling on the net seems to be the norm on many sites. Then again, you run with 5 mighty examples. I can't post the content of the FF twitter link with more than 100 posts without getting a warning. "Get cancer" is a nicer one from the list. Have you read it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
That would require them to read the tiny areas were something that could be called an organised Anti GG really exist. A well thought out argument has to be read first. And the heavy spinners are pretty much beyond salvation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
It worked once, until the context were provided afaik. They are fond of the method though, they also use it against reviews they don't like. Because ethics and free speech, you know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
I read articles from 'both sides', but it seems whatever the actual valid points actually were got lost in the wades of sewage which made the only logical response of 'stay away from it or get covered in it'.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
What are you, 12?Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
He said he wasn't, Quinn doesn't get mentioned until roughly the middle of the article and she gets about as much "air-time" as everyone else. so, to summarise, I see no evidence of bias in the article, there's no evidence they were in a relationship at the time, the article is not about Quinn but (partly) about Pepsi pushing a sexist angle and he's not written anything else about her since.
As far as Anita Sarkeesian goes, I'm not a big fan but what she says about games is broadly correct, in GTA you can beat prostitutes to death, steal all their cash and then if you get caught the cops confiscate some cash, you lose the car you were driving and that's it.
Her point is that while you can chose not to use that baseball bat, there's little incentive not to. You can actually be a "good" guy in GTA, murder a few prozies, get nicked and then go back the main plot where you agonise over the morals of being a "decent criminal"
I wonder how many guys I ruthlessly gunned down with little to no repercussions. Oh wait, no one actually cared about that because its a video game and the only people who complained were people who didn't actually play games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
Nothing that Sarkeesian actually says is particularly enlightening or interesting. She bluntly refuses to address any rebuttals, and often repeats points that are either subjective or circumstantial. She's basically the Food Babe (http://foodbabe.com/) of the gaming industry.
Sarkeesian does seem like a bit of a fruitcake, which is sad, because, let's face it, there's a quite a bit of sexism in games and it is an issue that should be at least discussed. Most gamers, unfortunately, refuse flat out to admit there's an issue at all.
Just curious, what examples do you have?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I think you rather miss the point, nobody's saying that GTA turns the average player into a sociopathic killer, the argument is that it fosters a callous attitude to other people, especially women.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
It's like in Crusader Kings II when the game asks you to consider "should I kill newborn Henry and then his Dad so I can inherit the throne".
It's not a healthy thought process, if you emotionally invest in games (many gamers do) then it raises questions about whether you should be confronted with/offered such choices.
In Mass Effect the well written female character all have fantastic buttocks, all wear skin tight pants and are often shot from behind, at waist level, when talking to the PC.Quote:
Originally Posted by CrossLOPER
When was the last time you saw a fat female character in a computer game who have significant dialogue?