Support NeoGAF

[NickFire]

I'm literally running out the door as you replied, but I assume you just picked me out of the large set by random. I'm gonna wager someone else will be able to reply to your concerns well enough.

If not, I'll reply when I get home in a few hours.

You are correct it was random selection from the set. And I would wager someone will surely reply "well enough" before you even get down the street, so don't rush home on my account.

 

[KingGondo]

I'll bite.

The problem is that the #GG hashtag and name has been corrupted and made ineffective for its (purported) legitimate aims by the actions of some of its members. This has only been exacerbated by the co-opting of the movement by hardcore right-wingers like Adam Baldwin, Mike Cernovich and Milo Yiannopolous. These guys do not give *one shit* about corruption in gaming journalism. They want to use the anger of naive gamers to further the culture wars against "feminazis" and "SJWs."

In addition to that, its "goals" are nebulous and nearly impossible to define, so it's very difficult to have a constructive conversation with someone who claims to be a member. The typical response of a GGer to criticism of the actions of someone claiming to represent it is the "No True Scotsman" gallacy.

There are legitimate discussions to be had about ethics in gaming journalism, but a particular site/reviewer's opinion of Depression Quest, Gone Home, or Bayo 2 does not fall into that category.

GamerGate is counterproductive at this point, and is only worsening the problems they claim to be so concerned about.

 

[More_Badass]

I'll bite. On the current page (when I began typing this) alone there are 4 distinct memes ridiculing the notion that GG has anything to do with ethics in gaming. I will and always have conceded there are numerous trolls using the movement to do deplorable things. But instead of focusing criticism solely at the trolls, many people firmly opposed to GG ridicule anyone at all who claims they support it because they are tired with the ethical issues. And if you look back in these 400 pages of posts, I have no doubt that many people who tried to generate consensus that there is a middle ground of people who support GG but detest the trolls, will be attacked by my more than 1 person who believes their view that GG is pure evil is the only permissible view, despite the widespread consensus that there are indeed issues with games journalism that raise suspicion on occasion.

My guess, and this is only a guess, but my guess is that the same people who will ridicule anyone at all for believing there is more to GG than trolling female developers, would also object to condemning every member of a religion or political group due to the horrible actions of a few. In any event, the people who aren't trolls and really want to see reform in the games media are not going to be convinced that there suspicions are wrong just because a few websites (who they already don't trust) and commenters post memes ridiculing the notion that the media has not always been on the up and up. Instead, they are going to naturally associate with the trolls, because the trolls are the lesser of two evils to them. No matter how pious we think of ourselves, its human nature to side with the people saying, "Yep, you're right", as opposed to "You are lying", or "There's no real issues here and you really just want to harass women." or something else to that effect.

So yeah, constantly criticizing anyone who says GG involves corruption in the press is absurd. It accomplishes nothing and is doing nothing more than giving the trollish part of the movement self-perceived legitimacy it never would have had otherwise.

So how is this "as bonkers and vicious as the arguments gamergaters use"?

 

[plagiarize]

I'll bite. On the current page (when I began typing this) alone there are 4 distinct memes ridiculing the notion that GG has anything to do with ethics in gaming. I will and always have conceded there are numerous trolls using the movement to do deplorable things. But instead of focusing criticism solely at the trolls, many people firmly opposed to GG ridicule anyone at all who claims they support it because they are tired with the ethical issues. And if you look back in these 400 pages of posts, I have no doubt that many people who tried to generate consensus that there is a middle ground of people who support GG but detest the trolls, will be attacked by my more than 1 person who believes their view that GG is pure evil is the only permissible view, despite the widespread consensus that there are indeed issues with games journalism that raise suspicion on occasion.

My guess, and this is only a guess, but my guess is that the same people who will ridicule anyone at all for believing there is more to GG than trolling female developers, would also object to condemning every member of a religion or political group due to the horrible actions of a few. In any event, the people who aren't trolls and really want to see reform in the games media are not going to be convinced that there suspicions are wrong just because a few websites (who they already don't trust) and commenters post memes ridiculing the notion that the media has not always been on the up and up. Instead, they are going to naturally associate with the trolls, because the trolls are the lesser of two evils to them. No matter how pious we think of ourselves, its human nature to side with the people saying, "Yep, you're right", as opposed to "You are lying", or "There's no real issues here and you really just want to harass women." or something else to that effect.

So yeah, constantly criticizing anyone who says GG involves corruption in the press is absurd. It accomplishes nothing and is doing nothing more than giving the trollish part of the movement self-perceived legitimacy it never would have had otherwise.

Functionally GamerGate has just gone after people that anti feminists have issues with. I see no good reason why someone who only cared about ethics in journalism would support such a group.

If you still support such a group, two months down the line, then yeah. You're getting ridiculed.

There are widespread concerns about ethics in gaming journalism. I'm glad you recognize that. Those concerns exists wholly separately to GamerGate. There is no need to join forces with the anti SJW brigade to raise such concerns. We didn't need to do it *before* to raise such concerns, so why do we need to do it now?

This group was *founded* by the anti SJW brigade. It's most visible and most vocal figure heads are all part of the anti SJW brigade.

If you associate with people like that, who I see as bigots, you're choosing to associate with bigots, and that is *only* going to hurt you in your efforts to improve gaming journalism.

I disagree with GamerGate because of the extreme, hateful stuff that has gone along with it (and because of their stance on the bayonetta 2 review at Polygon... a view point I've been condemning on GAF since at least 2008)... and not because of things they have raised about ethics.

It's a complete lie to say that anyone who disagrees with GamerGate disagrees with everything the movement has ever said.

But I do basically disagree with every single target they've picked, and every single approach they've taken to achieve their goals. And since they can't seem to decide on a public statement with regards to what their goals are, I'm going to look at the effect of their actions and decide that it's an anti feminist movement upset about the slim possibility that games will transform into something that isn't for them any more... who think any collateral damage done in trying to shut up people merely criticizing gaming... is worth it.

This has only been exacerbated by the co-opting of the movement by hardcore right-wingers like Adam Baldwin, Mike Cernovich and Milo Yiannopolous. These guys do not give *one shit* about corruption in gaming journalism. They want to use the anger of naive gamers to further the culture wars against "feminazis" and "SJWs."

A huge correction here.

Adam Baldwin didn't *co-opt* shit. He started the fucking hashtag. He was the first person to tweet it with regards to Zoe Quinn, and takes credit for it in interviews.

 

[gogosox82]

I interviewed a supporter of GamerGate for IBTimes UK. His name is Barry Smith, a 35-year-old supermarket shelf-stacker from Dundee, Scotland.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/gamergate-...l-movement-its-goals-threats-violence-1471560

What the fuck am I reading? Why would I read a review that didn't critique the content of the game/book/movie etc. So a "objective" review would be what, saying if the game isn't broken (ie it won't play)or not and if the box art looks good? These people have no idea what they are talking about.

 

[KHarvey16]

The entire topic of "ethics" as defined by gamergate hinges upon misogyny anyway. Suggesting personal opinions and politics can inform a critique is seen by this group as a breech of sacred game reviewer ethics. I'm glad people might be concerned about real issues regarding journalism and ethics but gamergate has literally nothing to do with those.

I mean, take a step back and look at what the group has actually accomplished. They have effected precisely 0 substantive change regarding journalism and ethics. Their accomplishments in oppressing and scaring the shit out of women in the games industry, however, are numerous.

 

[marrec]

Man, I can't find a clip of Morgan Freeman in Hard Rain to put "We just want ethics in game journalism" on it. In my head that's just the funniest thing.

 

[dead souls]

Wow. WOW. This is too perfect.

It really is, and you just know most of GG was #TeamWalt. The mere sight of Skyler probably sends them into a frothing rage.

 

[HarryHengst]

how can you review something like without being critical of it and forming an opinion based upon the content? trying to draw a distinction between reviewer and critic is ridiculous and does nothing.

They probably want all reviews to be like this: http://www.objectivegamereviews.com/

 

[truth-lasers]

 

[ShockingAlberto]

I just seriously want a gamergater to outline what ethics he means. I am perfectly willing to talk to them about it! It's just never about specific ethical concerns, it's usually "AND YOU'RE AGAINST ETHICS?!"

 

[Morrigan Stark]

It really is, and you just know most of GG was #TeamWalt. The mere sight of Skyler probably sends them into a frothing rage.

 

[Sir Abacus]

My contribution:

 

[plagiarize]

I just seriously want a gamergater to outline what ethics he means. I am perfectly willing to talk to them about it! It's just never about specific ethical concerns, it's usually "AND YOU'RE AGAINST ETHICS?!"

I talked to them. Mention SJWs and they'll spout off about how extreme feminists have co-opted and ruined this and that, and how SJWs are all liars who only care about pushing an agenda in order to make money and how SJWs don't really care about inclusivity at all.

You really don't have to dig deep at all. They see SJWs as the least ethical people in existence.

 

[Real Hero]

I just seriously want a gamergater to outline what ethics he means. I am perfectly willing to talk to them about it! It's just never about specific ethical concerns, it's usually "AND YOU'RE AGAINST ETHICS?!"

No SJW having too much influence blah blah cultural Marxist agenda blah blah

 

[The Blackrose]

I'll bite. On the current page (when I began typing this) alone there are 4 distinct memes ridiculing the notion that GG has anything to do with ethics in gaming. I will and always have conceded there are numerous trolls using the movement to do deplorable things. But instead of focusing criticism solely at the trolls, many people firmly opposed to GG ridicule anyone at all who claims they support it because they are tired with the ethical issues. And if you look back in these 400 pages of posts, I have no doubt that many people who tried to generate consensus that there is a middle ground of people who support GG but detest the trolls, will be attacked by my more than 1 person who believes their view that GG is pure evil is the only permissible view, despite the widespread consensus that there are indeed issues with games journalism that raise suspicion on occasion.

My guess, and this is only a guess, but my guess is that the same people who will ridicule anyone at all for believing there is more to GG than trolling female developers, would also object to condemning every member of a religion or political group due to the horrible actions of a few. In any event, the people who aren't trolls and really want to see reform in the games media are not going to be convinced that there suspicions are wrong just because a few websites (who they already don't trust) and commenters post memes ridiculing the notion that the media has not always been on the up and up. Instead, they are going to naturally associate with the trolls, because the trolls are the lesser of two evils to them. No matter how pious we think of ourselves, its human nature to side with the people saying, "Yep, you're right", as opposed to "You are lying", or "There's no real issues here and you really just want to harass women." or something else to that effect.

So yeah, constantly criticizing anyone who says GG involves corruption in the press is absurd. It accomplishes nothing and is doing nothing more than giving the trollish part of the movement self-perceived legitimacy it never would have had otherwise.

Here's the problem with the assertion that GG involves corruption in the press - it was founded on a flawed premise. It involved the outed sex life of an indie developer with members of an enthusiast press, which later was also outed that none of the people she had affairs with were involved in her work (and vice-versa). So your entire foundation is based on (possible) defamation, instead of using previous instances where game journalism really screwed the pooch (Gerstmann/Kane & Lynch, Doritogate).

Since then, the tag has shot in every direction. Harassment, dox, sea lions, certain people ingratiating themselves in the movement for their own means, etc. Very little of it has had to do with actual ethical issues in game journalism. The closest GG has even attempted to begin to broach the topic is by going after advertisers in a bid to get them to withdraw from publications. Of course, it wouldn't look that way given that every single time an advertiser has withdrawn, it was due to reactionary calls from people because that publication put out a piece that was negative towards GG's actions.

If anything, Gamergate is at best a study at the absolute exercise in futility that is hashtag activism when abusive parties are involved. Whoever came up with the GG scoreboard was brilliant and sad at the same time. While there are issues in GG worth pursuing, it's not going to go anywhere on the foundation it was built and continues to expand upon.

 

[HarryHengst]

What i also cannot understand is why the people who truly are concerned about ethics arent abandoning the poisoned tag of gamergate and start a new one. Instead they cling to GG like someone with Stockholm Syndrome.

 

[NickFire]

The problem is that the #GG hashtag and name has been corrupted and made ineffective for its (purported) legitimate aims by the actions of some of its members. This has only been exacerbated by the co-opting of the movement by hardcore right-wingers like Adam Baldwin, Mike Cernovich and Milo Yiannopolous. These guys do not give *one shit* about corruption in gaming journalism. They want to use the anger of naive gamers to further the culture wars against "feminazis" and "SJWs."

In addition to that, its "goals" are nebulous and nearly impossible to define, so it's very difficult to have a constructive conversation with someone who claims to be a member. The typical response of a GGer to criticism of the actions of someone claiming to represent it is the "No True Scotsman" gallacy.

There are legitimate discussions to be had about ethics in gaming journalism, but a particular site/reviewer's opinion of Depression Quest, Gone Home, or Bayo 2 does not fall into that category.

GamerGate is counterproductive at this point, and is only worsening the problems they claim to be so concerned about.

I agree there is an element of corruption by the trolls, but its not even close to ineffective. The people supporting it have lost nothing of import to them, and are actually gaining. Advertisers have taken notice, and admittedly or not, so has the gaming press (and not as much for the reasons those opposed to the movement wish). While a few journalists / bloggers may decry it from time to time, no company with 7 (or more) figure gross incomes from gaming will criticize it too much or for too long, because a ton of money is at stake, and one thing inherent with GG supporters, is they all buy games.

The arguments of GG may be ineffective on message boards, but their wallets have far more influence on the industry than anyone arguing against it.

 

[jstripes]

I'll bite. On the current page (when I began typing this) alone there are 4 distinct memes ridiculing the notion that GG has anything to do with ethics in gaming. I will and always have conceded there are numerous trolls using the movement to do deplorable things. But instead of focusing criticism solely at the trolls, many people firmly opposed to GG ridicule anyone at all who claims they support it because they are tired with the ethical issues. And if you look back in these 400 pages of posts, I have no doubt that many people who tried to generate consensus that there is a middle ground of people who support GG but detest the trolls, will be attacked by my more than 1 person who believes their view that GG is pure evil is the only permissible view, despite the widespread consensus that there are indeed issues with games journalism that raise suspicion on occasion.

My guess, and this is only a guess, but my guess is that the same people who will ridicule anyone at all for believing there is more to GG than trolling female developers, would also object to condemning every member of a religion or political group due to the horrible actions of a few. In any event, the people who aren't trolls and really want to see reform in the games media are not going to be convinced that there suspicions are wrong just because a few websites (who they already don't trust) and commenters post memes ridiculing the notion that the media has not always been on the up and up. Instead, they are going to naturally associate with the trolls, because the trolls are the lesser of two evils to them. No matter how pious we think of ourselves, its human nature to side with the people saying, "Yep, you're right", as opposed to "You are lying", or "There's no real issues here and you really just want to harass women." or something else to that effect.

So yeah, constantly criticizing anyone who says GG involves corruption in the press is absurd. It accomplishes nothing and is doing nothing more than giving the trollish part of the movement self-perceived legitimacy it never would have had otherwise.

Many have turned to ridicule because it's gotten so ridiculous. We're tired of constantly debating the endless, repetitive stream of long-debunked #GG talking points.

The whole "it's about games journalism" meme is inspired by the mindless repetitiveness use of it for justification.

 

[riotous]

 

[Corto]

I'll bite. On the current page (when I began typing this) alone there are 4 distinct memes ridiculing the notion that GG has anything to do with ethics in gaming. I will and always have conceded there are numerous trolls using the movement to do deplorable things. But instead of focusing criticism solely at the trolls, many people firmly opposed to GG ridicule anyone at all who claims they support it because they are tired with the ethical issues. And if you look back in these 400 pages of posts, I have no doubt that many people who tried to generate consensus that there is a middle ground of people who support GG but detest the trolls, will be attacked by my more than 1 person who believes their view that GG is pure evil is the only permissible view, despite the widespread consensus that there are indeed issues with games journalism that raise suspicion on occasion.

My guess, and this is only a guess, but my guess is that the same people who will ridicule anyone at all for believing there is more to GG than trolling female developers, would also object to condemning every member of a religion or political group due to the horrible actions of a few. In any event, the people who aren't trolls and really want to see reform in the games media are not going to be convinced that there suspicions are wrong just because a few websites (who they already don't trust) and commenters post memes ridiculing the notion that the media has not always been on the up and up. Instead, they are going to naturally associate with the trolls, because the trolls are the lesser of two evils to them. No matter how pious we think of ourselves, its human nature to side with the people saying, "Yep, you're right", as opposed to "You are lying", or "There's no real issues here and you really just want to harass women." or something else to that effect.

So yeah, constantly criticizing anyone who says GG involves corruption in the press is absurd. It accomplishes nothing and is doing nothing more than giving the trollish part of the movement self-perceived legitimacy it never would have had otherwise.

Gamergate is not a religion, a philosophical current, a race or creed. It's originally a fabricated harassment movement that at a certain point morphed into a disguised consumer rights movement to become more easily palatable to defend in public and to turn recruitment of "shield bodies" more easy. At this point ridicule and turning it into an internet meme that will shrink and die is the most perfect fate it can have.

 

[-griffy-]

https://twitter.com/zpxlng/status/525643616304107521

This one was great, but SPOILER WARNING for Breaking Bad if you haven't finished it, so I'll just link the tweet rather than posting the image.

This just made me choke on my coffee at work. So good.

 

[marrec]

I just seriously want a gamergater to outline what ethics he means. I am perfectly willing to talk to them about it! It's just never about specific ethical concerns, it's usually "AND YOU'RE AGAINST ETHICS?!"

I've talked with many of them and when you drill down it usually ends up being really about journalism being corrupted by unnamed SJWs that certainly aren't Zoe Quinn or Anita Sarkeesian (cause its not about them) but just happen to be saying the same things as those two.

 

[frequency]

What the fuck am I reading? Why would I read a review that didn't critique the content of the game/book/movie etc. So a "objective" review would be what, saying if the game isn't broken (ie it won't play)or not and if the box art looks good? These people have no idea what they are talking about.

Saying if art looks good or not is subjective actually.

They probably want all reviews to be like this: http://www.objectivegamereviews.com/

No one actually wants that. They just say "objective" here to mean "devoid of opinions I disagree with". But by using a word like "objective", they hope to legitimize their call for censorship.

No one is going on and on about the other Bayonetta 2 reviews for example. But every single one of them (actually, every single review ever) is just as subjective as Polygon's.

 

[Vlade]

I'll bite. On the current page (when I began typing this) alone there are 4 distinct memes ridiculing the notion that GG has anything to do with ethics in gaming. I will and always have conceded there are numerous trolls using the movement to do deplorable things. But instead of focusing criticism solely at the trolls, many people firmly opposed to GG ridicule anyone at all who claims they support it because they are tired with the ethical issues. And if you look back in these 400 pages of posts, I have no doubt that many people who tried to generate consensus that there is a middle ground of people who support GG but detest the trolls, will be attacked by my more than 1 person who believes their view that GG is pure evil is the only permissible view, despite the widespread consensus that there are indeed issues with games journalism that raise suspicion on occasion.

My guess, and this is only a guess, but my guess is that the same people who will ridicule anyone at all for believing there is more to GG than trolling female developers, would also object to condemning every member of a religion or political group due to the horrible actions of a few. In any event, the people who aren't trolls and really want to see reform in the games media are not going to be convinced that there suspicions are wrong just because a few websites (who they already don't trust) and commenters post memes ridiculing the notion that the media has not always been on the up and up. Instead, they are going to naturally associate with the trolls, because the trolls are the lesser of two evils to them. No matter how pious we think of ourselves, its human nature to side with the people saying, "Yep, you're right", as opposed to "You are lying", or "There's no real issues here and you really just want to harass women." or something else to that effect.

So yeah, constantly criticizing anyone who says GG involves corruption in the press is absurd. It accomplishes nothing and is doing nothing more than giving the trollish part of the movement self-perceived legitimacy it never would have had otherwise.

I have no idea what you are seeing if you think there is any other active part of GG that is not the "trolls". The "trolls" started GG, they are GG, there is nothing else but the shroud of useful idiots (well meaning as they may be). There are no trolls, just GG. The sentiment in your post is why the memes are funny.

 

[FoneBone]

Goodgamers.us, the site founded by GGers to provide "unbiased" games journalism avoiding "socially political" messages, has not updated in over a week.

 

[More_Badass]

NickFire, I'm still lost here. I don't get how what you discussed is, as you said, "as bonkers and vicious as the arguments gamergaters use"

 

[Galactic Fork]

What the fuck am I reading? Why would I read a review that didn't critique the content of the game/book/movie etc. So a "objective" review would be what, saying if the game isn't broken (ie it won't play)or not and if the box art looks good? These people have no idea what they are talking about.

How dare you say that box art looks good! That's not ethical!

 

[NoblesseOblige]

I'm probably not the best at making meme things, but I tried:

 

[BiggNife]

This is the first time I've made a gif like this, I felt inspired

 

[EmCeeGramr]

okay so finding a doom menu font is hell but i really want to see Icon of Sin but the spawned enemies all have twitter eggs for heads and John Romero says MSILANRUOJ NI SCIHTE TUOBA S'TI, YLLAUTCA

 

[Beelzebufo]

https://twitter.com/zpxlng/status/525643616304107521

This one was great, but SPOILER WARNING for Breaking Bad if you haven't finished it, so I'll just link the tweet rather than posting the image.

Holy crap, that's great haha. Maybe we'll get there eventually, but hopefully it doesn't have to be in a similar way to the show!

 

[sasliquid]

today i feel very tired in regards to gamergate. I don't know if there's anything I can do and I'm afraid its going to hold the industry back. Gaming is such a big part of my life and I've made so many friends through it but I don't know if I can stay in an industry where gamergate is a thing.

Hopefully I'll get my energy back if I play some games

 

[Spookie]

Goodgamers.us, the site founded by GGers to provide "unbiased" games journalism avoiding "socially political" messages, has not updated in over a week.

Must have missed the PR message from the Payday studio letting them know they are putting a movie tie in, into their game. ;/

 

[marrec]

today i feel very tired in regards to gamergate. I don't know if there's anything I can do and I'm afraid its going to hold the industry back. Gaming is such a big part of my life and I've made so many friends through it but I don't know if I can stay in an industry where gamergate is a thing.

Hopefully I'll get my energy back if I play some games

Do what I'm gunna do. Play some Civ: BE and take a break.

 

[MYeager]

A critic does a critical analysis of something and judges it, this is appropriate for political and social issues for example. This is not what reviews are for, they are consumer products. This is NOT stopping something to incorporate both, it can have both aspects, but most of the time one side is lacking. Videogames should follow this same approach that the film and book industry follow identically, the separation of reviewer/review and critic/critical analysis.
[/url]

The film and book industry reviews absolutely include political and social issues within them. Movie reviews question the violence within films all the time, not to mention the social issues or what the message of the movie is. Ditto book reviews. One of my favorite authors, Dan Simmons, had people questioning his motivations for having Islam having conquered society because people were too politically correct to stop it even though it wasn't the theme of the book and background dressing for the story he was telling. If anything you'll see a lot more variation in score due to the personal opinions of the reviewer reflecting more in those reviews while most game reviewers will still give high scores to a game no matter how offensive it is to them personally because it was well produced.

I'd love it if video game reviews were more like movie and book reviews.

Regardless even from a consumer product perspective that's ridiculous. Making any kind of buying recommendation is based of personal opinion of the product, and if some of that opinion was formed from social issues with the product it's better to explain that than hide it from the consumer reading the review.

 

[More_Badass]

Goodgamers.us, the site founded by GGers to provide "unbiased" games journalism avoiding "socially political" messages, has not updated in over a week.

For all the talk of wanting objective reviews, the review are awfully subjective
http://www.goodgamers.us/2014/10/16/alien-isolation-review/
Hell, the opening paragraph gives a subjective context on how he felt going into the game (huge fan of Alien franchise) and how he feels about horror games (is terrible at them)

But totally unbiased and objective...

 

[NickFire]

Here's the problem with the assertion that GG involves corruption in the press - it was founded on a flawed premise. It involved the outed sex life of an indie developer with members of an enthusiast press, which later was also outed that none of the people she had affairs with were involved in her work (and vice-versa). So your entire foundation is based on (possible) defamation, instead of using previous instances where game journalism really screwed the pooch (Gerstmann/Kane & Lynch, Doritogate).

Since then, the tag has shot in every direction. Harassment, dox, sea lions, certain people ingratiating themselves in the movement for their own means, etc. Very little of it has had to do with actual ethical issues in game journalism. The closest GG has even attempted to begin to broach the topic is by going after advertisers in a bid to get them to withdraw from publications. Of course, it wouldn't look that way given that every single time an advertiser has withdrawn, it was due to reactionary calls from people because that publication put out a piece that was negative towards GG's actions.

If anything, Gamergate is at best a study at the absolute exercise in futility that is hashtag activism when abusive parties are involved. Whoever came up with the GG scoreboard was brilliant and sad at the same time. While there are issues in GG worth pursuing, it's not going to go anywhere on the foundation it was built and continues to expand upon.

Whatever the premise it was founded on, today there are people who believe it is about ethics, and who don't condone the nonsense. My theme is don't ridicule them, focus just on the trolls. Divide and conquer. Don't make enemies where there are probably none just to be declared right. But I have long since learned my lesson that there is no point trying to convince anyone of a different path towards dealing with the trolls. Best of luck everyone, I'll return to the sidelines again to see who wins. The GG wallets or the people who want the industry to stop dipping their hands into said wallets.

 

[gogosox82]

I agree there is an element of corruption by the trolls, but its not even close to ineffective. The people supporting it have lost nothing of import to them, and are actually gaining. Advertisers have taken notice, and admittedly or not, so has the gaming press (and not as much for the reasons those opposed to the movement wish). While a few journalists / bloggers may decry it from time to time, no company with 7 (or more) figure gross incomes from gaming will criticize it too much or for too long, because a ton of money is at stake, and one thing inherent with GG supporters, is they all buy games.

The arguments of GG may be ineffective on message boards, but their wallets have far more influence on the industry than anyone arguing against it.

But that's not what they want. They claim they want better journalism but by getting ads pulled you will only get worse journalism b/c websites wouldn't publish critical articles or all the websites would go away and there wouldn't be any games journos at all. Which is the exact opposite of what they claim they want. If their goal is to ruin games journalism then maybe you have a point, but every gamergater I've talked said they want better games journalism, not to ruin it.

 

[More_Badass]

Do what I'm gunna do. Play some Civ: BE and take a break.

I just go play Broforce and blow shit up for an hour or two. Gets me into a happy mood

 

[Sir Abacus]

I don't know if there's anything I can do and I'm afraid its going to hold the industry back.

Keep gaming. The industry will work itself out and the games already available aren't going away. You can only be responsible for your own behaviour. Don't be a douche to people, male or female. Set the best example for the way you want gaming to be.

 

[Corpekata]

The goodgamers.us owner (or editor, not sure) is also in the Sarkeesian Effect "documentary." No politics here, just a casual interview with supervillain in training Davis Aurini.

 

[MYeager]

What the fuck am I reading? Why would I read a review that didn't critique the content of the game/book/movie etc. So a "objective" review would be what, saying if the game isn't broken (ie it won't play)or not and if the box art looks good? These people have no idea what they are talking about.

Woah there partner. Your subjective opinion about the art style on the cover of the box is something you should keep to yourself.

 

[plutoknight]

This is the first time I've made a gif like this but I felt inspired

This is my new favorite GIF. Thank you.

 

[GeordieMark]

today i feel very tired in regards to gamergate. I don't know if there's anything I can do and I'm afraid its going to hold the industry back. Gaming is such a big part of my life and I've made so many friends through it but I don't know if I can stay in an industry where gamergate is a thing.

Hopefully I'll get my energy back if I play some games

The proportion of people who even know about GG that play videogames is ridiculously small.

I really wouldn't stress yourself about it.

 

[SwissLion]

I agree there is an element of corruption by the trolls, but its not even close to ineffective. The people supporting it have lost nothing of import to them, and are actually gaining. Advertisers have taken notice, and admittedly or not, so has the gaming press (and not as much for the reasons those opposed to the movement wish). While a few journalists / bloggers may decry it from time to time, no company with 7 (or more) figure gross incomes from gaming will criticize it too much or for too long, because a ton of money is at stake, and one thing inherent with GG supporters, is they all buy games.

The arguments of GG may be ineffective on message boards, but their wallets have far more influence on the industry than anyone arguing against it.

You say 'advertisers are taking notice' but notice of what?

What unethical journalism are you using as justification for the pulling of advertising.

So far I've seen three answers to this.

"Leigh Alexander's article on Gamasutra was unethical" (It wasn't. It was opinion. Getting intel to pull ad dollars because of an opinion is explicity anti-journalism)

"Gawker is pro-bullying!" (Apart from this having nothing to do with Games Journalism, it was a dumb joke he's since apologised for. This is monumentally dumb for a movement about ethics in games journalism)

"GameJournoPros! Collusion!" (This is about as close as it gets but 90% of the people citing it clearly have not even read the cherrypicked thread Milo pulled out of the google group. There's no evidence of collusion on anything in there and is in fact mostly arguing. Saying an online version of a Press Club exists is not evidence of corruption.)

So please, if you're going to hold up removal of advertising dollars from sites as a victory for ethical journalism, show your fucking working.

OR YOU COULD LEAVE BEFORE JUSTIFYING ANYTHING ABOUT YOUR POSITION THAT'S COOL TOO

 

[Vlade]

Whatever the premise it was founded on, today there are people who believe it is about ethics, and who don't condone the nonsense. My theme is don't ridicule them, focus just on the trolls. Divide and conquer. Don't make enemies where there are probably none just to be declared right. But I have long since learned my lesson that there is no point trying to convince anyone of a different path towards dealing with the trolls. Best of luck everyone, I'll return to the sidelines again to see who wins. The GG wallets or the people who want the industry to stop dipping their hands into said wallets.

I thought we were focusing on the trolls when we mock those repeating "actually, GG is about ethics in games journalism" when there are published manifestos that do not appear to be such.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

While a few journalists / bloggers may decry it from time to time, no company with 7 (or more) figure gross incomes from gaming will criticize it too much or for too long, because a ton of money is at stake, and one thing inherent with GG supporters, is they all buy games.

The arguments of GG may be ineffective on message boards, but their wallets have far more influence on the industry than anyone arguing against it.

I think you're reaaaaaally overestimating the amount of gamer gators and their economic influence. If anything, a lot of people refrain from commenting because they don't want to be flooded in shit like it happened to so many people.

 

[Corto]

okay so finding a doom menu font is hell but i really want to see Icon of Sin but the spawned enemies all have twitter eggs for heads and John Romero says MSILANRUOJ NI SCIHTE TUOBA S'TI, YLLAUTCA

Found this:

http://www.dafont.com/doom.font

 

[Mimir]

What the fuck am I reading? Why would I read a review that didn't critique the content of the game/book/movie etc. So a "objective" review would be what, saying if the game isn't broken (ie it won't play)or not and if the box art looks good? These people have no idea what they are talking about.

A reviewer's job is to simply fact-check the features list of a game, and then print that, obviously. They may need to remove any subjective bullet points though.