HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I have a very hard time believing that anyone other than the hardcore are a part of GG anymore.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Zoë Quinn writes on games industry's reaction to harassment "Risky Business"
- Thread starter ElNarez
- Start date
I have a very hard time believing that anyone other than the hardcore are a part of GG anymore.
QuickSilverD
Member
I know for a fact Milo has actually apologized on twitter and twitch for his past comments towards gamers. I "think" he's come to see gaming in a whole different light. He's even done some twitch streams where he's sat down and tried different games for himself.
There's naïve people who will get behind any cause.
Let's not forget, gibblygoobs also championed Jack Thompson and welcomed him to their side.
JACK.
THOMPSON.
If there was any evidence out there that a good majority of gator's weren't even cognizant of the political nature of video games 10 years ago, that's proof right there.
DICKS AHOY
Banned
The beginning of GG preyed more on the politically apathetic who don't care about social-issues in games one way or the other but have a disliking of Kotaku or Polygon, rather than just the conservative types you find on /pol/ who really aren't going to care about being judged for liberally throwing around slurs. NotYourShield would've been pointless if they cared only hardcore conservative because otherwise there wouldn't have been a push to appear more racially/sexually diverse.
There's absolutely those hardcore neo-con types or conspiracy theorists surrounding themselves with useful idiots who just want more clicks for their own sites, but I feel too many people don't really look at things from a teen/college-aged gamer's perspective who isn't invested in politics and is going to be more inclined to the side that's preaching EVERYTHING IS A-OKAY. Especially if they're the type that likes their games fanservicey or all out violent and interpret stuff like Anita's videos as being a vehemently anti-sex push to take everything they like away from them rather than the Youtuber critique they actually are. GG has really shown this industry is way too juvenile to have any sort of nuanced debate about any of this stuff without going to violent extremes and ironically made the people it targeted near-untouchable in most public discussions.
I sort of intentionally took myself out of the loop six months ago because arguing GG with people became too much of a pain in the ass, but I'd be interested to learn what major games Alex apparently used to work on, especially if those studios were being inundated with angry internet people wanted him fired for dating someone.
On the flip-side having Brietbart on their side immediately meant most western news sources outside gaming weren't going to take GG seriously, which seemed to (initially anyway) strike a lot of them as a surprise. All goes back to a lot of GG'rs being politically apathetic and not being aware of this stuff until it's too late and you can't really go back on who you've sided with.
There's absolutely those hardcore neo-con types or conspiracy theorists surrounding themselves with useful idiots who just want more clicks for their own sites, but I feel too many people don't really look at things from a teen/college-aged gamer's perspective who isn't invested in politics and is going to be more inclined to the side that's preaching EVERYTHING IS A-OKAY. Especially if they're the type that likes their games fanservicey or all out violent and interpret stuff like Anita's videos as being a vehemently anti-sex push to take everything they like away from them rather than the Youtuber critique they actually are. GG has really shown this industry is way too juvenile to have any sort of nuanced debate about any of this stuff without going to violent extremes and ironically made the people it targeted near-untouchable in most public discussions.
I sort of intentionally took myself out of the loop six months ago because arguing GG with people became too much of a pain in the ass, but I'd be interested to learn what major games Alex apparently used to work on, especially if those studios were being inundated with angry internet people wanted him fired for dating someone.
For me it's more the specific articles like linking gaming to sociopaths like Elliot Rodgers and comparing it to the fallout Anita gets for (from GG's perspective) calling gamers sexist. If I had to choose one of hte two, I'd say I'd prefer being called out for liking anime tits in a video game than blaming a shooting massacre on video games, but the immediate acceptance of Milo's apology in comparison to Anita or even other actual legit journalist fuck-ups who apologized that keep getting brought up (Jason Schrier making fun of Dragon's Crown art style and the dumb GAF debate afterwards for instance) is really transparent. Thompson example above me is also a great example of the blatant double-standard.
On the flip-side having Brietbart on their side immediately meant most western news sources outside gaming weren't going to take GG seriously, which seemed to (initially anyway) strike a lot of them as a surprise. All goes back to a lot of GG'rs being politically apathetic and not being aware of this stuff until it's too late and you can't really go back on who you've sided with.
Did he ever apologize for this? I'm genuinely curious, I haven't followed him closely lately.
He did. It was within the same first few weeks when he apologized after people did some digging. After his "apology" he started a twitch stream and played his very first game in his life. He's now "fighting for real gamers" and all that crap. He was very quick to 180 on everything at the drop of a hat to get new readership. And those people were also super quick to forgive and I just have no idea why.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Because he's not a woman
Quoting for another page as people need to be reminded of this (not that a lot of people ITT need to be told that GamerGate is bad, but at the same time some may not understand the full extent).
Yeah. They really show their true colors around women. I remember they outed Lizzy once even though she defended them constantly and made articles on A Voice for Men.
BUNTING1243
Banned
That's really the one of the most infuriating thing about Gamergate as someone who likes games. The people "leading" it don't give a fucking shit about games, they're just pushing their bullshit anti-feminist anti-progressive ideology and getting attention. It is LITERALLY what they are claiming "the other side" are doing.
And the way it's just accepted by everyone is absolutely insane and hypocritical. I love how they refuse to believe that people like Sarkeesan care about games despite zero evidence to the contrary, while completely believing that in the three months between Milo insinuating that games were responsible for Elliot Rodgers and Gamergate happening that he just magically had a change of thought. Never mind how much publicity and money him and his like have probably gotten from this mess.
Ugh, it just makes me so annoyed. I don't remember the last time I've disliked a writer as much as Milo Yianoppolus. He's like a smarmy asshole #notallmen 14 year old fuckwit in a grown body who's become rich off of underpaying his writers and manipulating people into believing his hateful garbage. A dog in an old-timey reporter's cap has infinity more journalistic integrity than he does and would probably be way more fun to have a conversation with.
Jeff Gerstmann of Giant Bomb streams his drive to work on mixlr and takes calls from people who want to ask him questions about games and the industry, and a few weeks ago got a call from a Gamergator demanding to know why he hadn't not only done more to support Gamergate, but why he'd actively denounced it.
The whole thing is fascinating honestly to hear someone so all over the place in their sense of persecution, but the reason I'm bringing this up in this thread is because at one point the caller alluded to the Zoe Quinn thing and how it felt true and there was no smoke without fire, and Jeff succinctly pointed out even if it were true, 100% of the ethical responsibility in that scenario is on his end of the business (ie; the people covering the games) and not on the publisher/developer side (ie; Quinn).
So you're absolutely right in that the whole movement ostensibly about ethics in video games journalism is a sham because even in their bullshit allegations they go after the woman, and not the male journalist.
vxXJordanXxv
Banned
Yeah after this thread I am out. I despise gamer gate but I also have legitimate criticism for Anita and Zoe but unfortunately every time there is I see banned near someone's name. The harassment to them was and continues to be evil but that doesn't mean someone should be immune to criticism. Gonna ask a mod to ban this account or if they see this post just yeah. Anyways thanks for the opportunity to be apart of this community. Good luck!
DannyDanger
Gold Member
Never found the tweets I was referring (came directly from a female developer)
A user actually helped me with a couple of sources. But since I couldn't find the direct tweets I'll just take the L
A user actually helped me with a couple of sources. But since I couldn't find the direct tweets I'll just take the L
Neoriceisgood
Member
An inability to spread what often verges on outright libel & unsubstantiated rumors that are prone to derail a thread rather than form constructive dialogue =! immunity from criticism.
Though I guess you're just another martyr for the cause. We shall all remember you for your noble selfless act.
Jesus... well, good on Gerstmann for sticking with that call and trying not to, well, deride this caller in any real way. But jesus...
This... this is plain evil. He got away with saying that awful shit, and those GG fuckheads still support him. Like, can they be any more oblivious to reality?
This post by Zoe is really depressing to read. I never thought that her boyfriend had to go through all this ordeal too, but he stood with her all along. Of course, it's no surprise to see how badly the industry reacted to him, especially after the deafening silence about the matter that's been happening ever since this mess started (and even before), but it's still so sad to see.
Wolves Evolve
Member
Yep. Gertsmann has been a total pro about this. He's said multiple times that yes, there's huge ethics issues in journalism (he should know!) but that he emphatically rejects Gamergate.
erotic grandpa
Member
I almost felt bad for the guy*, but his reactions to Jeff's rebukes reminded me too much of this.
Jeff handles that call super well, and has an amazing way of turning the tables and calling that guy out on his bullshit that shakes the caller up a couple of times.
*
nah not really
I especially love "Can you even make Dead or Alive with breast physics and all nowadays??"
"DOA5 just came out... and was just as if not more ridiculous with the breast physics as ever."
".... Oh well I am not so up to date on these things, I guess."
Like wtf is this guy even trying to argue? Then he starts attributing changes to Saturday Morning Cartoons to "the SJWs", and then praising Jeff for leaving Gamespot as some stand for righteousness or some nonsense... Like, no, Jeff was fired, all because their new PR people didn't know how to handle publisher pressure. Jeff's awesome, but he ain't some Christ figure...
GoodCoffeeJoey
Banned
Surprise, surprise.
Weltall Zero
Member
Can't really add much to this other than the usual "fuck GamerGate and everything it stands for", except perhaps "thank you mainstream gaming industry for giving me another reason to hate your cowardly conservative ass".
I actually just Googled images of Zoë Quinn just now to put a face on her, and Jesus Christ, she's just a child (from the perspective of someone like me who's almost 40). That makes it all the more heartbreaking the shit she and her boyfriend are going through, and depressing to think how much more they will have to put through. Glad to see she at least still has the strength to keep fighting and reporting her story.
I actually just Googled images of Zoë Quinn just now to put a face on her, and Jesus Christ, she's just a child (from the perspective of someone like me who's almost 40). That makes it all the more heartbreaking the shit she and her boyfriend are going through, and depressing to think how much more they will have to put through. Glad to see she at least still has the strength to keep fighting and reporting her story.
Vincent Grayson
Member
I wish that were the case, but unless people are doing it just to keep an eye on them, the subs on KiA continue to climb week after week, and it's much higher (by about 10k) than when GG was going strong in late 2014.
Shyakugaun
Banned
My problem with the whole thing from what I barely understand of the GG debacle is , almost everyone who complained about gamergate tried to paint us gamers as if we are all the same, as if we all just get online an harass women 24/7, I mean just take a look at that ABC night line special, smfh which judging by this thread alone, is severely not true, also, they seem to take the general, hostile, nasty, nature of the internet, an try to bundle it as some kind of unique feature of gamer gate, ppl are shitty ppl for some reason when they get online, trolls attack everyone, especially ppl with whom they disagree with.
Does this make what they've done any less harmful, no, does it make the ppl who were attacked any less credible no, do women face opposition in this business, obviously yes, do they face unique hurdles that males dont, yes im sure, but being harrassed on the net isnt one of them, but to me from the outside looking in on the issue, them trying to make it seem like there getting attacked on the internet only because there female, wich imo, isn't true, your being attacked because you have opossing, to some controversial, opinions on a medium some ppl consider a lifestyle, so they feel threatened, an react.
Basically what I'm saying is, a lot of there proof of GG harassment, to me is basic lvl internet harassment that we all have dealt with at some point, from swatting, to bullying, to hacking, to racism, to sexism, to virtual mob lynching of individuals, though some of the GG stuff I've read has surpassed basic internet trolling, like the stalking, house calling, voice death threats,that's legit complaints to me, at that point I can understand being in fear, those are the guys u need to be focused on, not your common twitter troll.
Anyway hopefully my point was understood, feel free to pick my comment apart, as I've said I have limited knowledge on GG. GG sakes way to large to even try an begin to fully understand now
Does this make what they've done any less harmful, no, does it make the ppl who were attacked any less credible no, do women face opposition in this business, obviously yes, do they face unique hurdles that males dont, yes im sure, but being harrassed on the net isnt one of them, but to me from the outside looking in on the issue, them trying to make it seem like there getting attacked on the internet only because there female, wich imo, isn't true, your being attacked because you have opossing, to some controversial, opinions on a medium some ppl consider a lifestyle, so they feel threatened, an react.
Basically what I'm saying is, a lot of there proof of GG harassment, to me is basic lvl internet harassment that we all have dealt with at some point, from swatting, to bullying, to hacking, to racism, to sexism, to virtual mob lynching of individuals, though some of the GG stuff I've read has surpassed basic internet trolling, like the stalking, house calling, voice death threats,that's legit complaints to me, at that point I can understand being in fear, those are the guys u need to be focused on, not your common twitter troll.
Anyway hopefully my point was understood, feel free to pick my comment apart, as I've said I have limited knowledge on GG. GG sakes way to large to even try an begin to fully understand now
ClosingADoor
Member
That is the problem, they don't know what they are arguing. And that actually makes it even harder to get them to see reason.
Because they don't have a real point beside 'feminist are somehow destroying gaming' they get to jump around from unrelated issue to unrelated issue while reinforcing their own viewpoint with their nonsense arguments.
And of course this all goes through social media and Twitter, which makes it so fragmented that the people supporting Gamergate don't even know what they are arguing about anymore and still believe nonsense they read months and months ago that have been proven to be wrong time and time again.
It is no point arguing with Gamergate supporters. We can only hope they get tired of their little crusade, but I'm afraid they won't. I would have thought this had died out months and months ago, but a group of people are still holding on and refuse to give up harassing people online.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
No, they really didn't. This ladies and gentleman is what is known as confirmation bias. Which is exactly what Gamergate relies upon to continue its narrative.
Well at least you see that GG is criminal, I think? Though you're missing bomb and school shooting threats in that list.
GoonerTRON
Banned
+1
Yes they did.
I still remember the *Gamers are dead* articles.
That's all I really know about this entire thing.
More_Badass
Member
Oh god, not this again
Edit:
1) The articles actually never said "gamers are dead"
2) it was an article aimed at and talking to developers, not the general public
3) the whole point those articles were making was that gaming has become more expansive and inclusive than ever before, and that the stereotypical "gamer" demographic is obsolete since everyone plays games nowadays.
EdibleKnife
Member
The article is "Gamers are over" . Not dead.
Also:
chaobreaker said:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=135783202&postcount=5
I'll never figure out why Leigh, a gamer who's job is also to write about games, is constantly accused of persecuting gamers
Like I said earlier, a very important thing to note about "Gamers are Dead" that has been (probably intentionally) obscured is that they were obviously a response to the ZQ thing in the first place; if a bunch of shitheads hadn't gone after her they likely wouldn't have happened.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Obviously you didn't read that article (which you couldn't even get the title of correct), or you lack the ability to comprehend what it was getting at. In any case, that's a single article. Where is this "everyone" the other user was talking about? You're being a victim to your own bias.
Edit: And for further clarification it wasn't "Gamers are dead", it wasn't even "Gamers are over" it was "'Gamers' are over". See those extra single-quote marks around the word gamer? It's referring to the stereotypical gamer. You know, the toxic hardcore archetype that Gamergate has basically latched onto, becoming a real caricature of it.
Even that you don't seem to get.
QuantumZebra
Member
yup Goobergate is full of mental giants who are totally against censorship unless it applies to them... its amazing
QuantumZebra
Member
considering there were no "Gamers are dead" (went by a totally different name and had a different meaning - look it up) articles.... you don't know anything about this entire thing apparently
When Alexander's article was blowing up I read it, and I honestly didn't (and still don't) know what all the fuss is about. All she's saying is that more people play games than the stereotypical gamer and that you don't have to please them to be successful. I mean sure it's questionable as to whether it's responsible to go out of your way to hate on basement dwelling neck beards but the article was very specifically targeted. I didn't get angry about it because I don't think it wasn't aimed at me and I'm not sure why other people who don't think it was aimed at them decided to get angry about it... it wasn't aimed at them. (I guess the real secret is that they know it was aimed at them and they're insecure about it).
QuantumZebra
Member
She dared to challenge a decades old stereotype whilst also being a woman.
Lalalandia
Member
You remember a thing that never happened then? The title included the phrase 'Gamers are over' and if you had read it (which you clearly haven't) you'd have known she specifically called out the toxic minority of gamers who behave in the fashion we have all come to know and loathe as 'GG'
Taking that one single "Gamers are dead" (notice the "" she even used in the headline) so literally is still one of the most amazing things. That it was only one article and they couldn't handle this harmless opinion is of course par of course.
Lol. May I ask what you even tried to prove? That she deserves it?
Interfectum
Member
These people also cling to Breitbart for all the latest news and updates. We aren't dealing with the sharpest tools in the shed here.
Camp Freddie
Member
The article was called:
'Gamers' don't have to be your audience. 'Gamers' are over
I didn't like the article at first, because I considered myself a gamer and it starts off by dismissing gamers as just teenage boys laughing about memes, and goes on to call them obtuse shit-slingers and other derogatory terms.
But after really reading it, the article is spot on.
It's not talking about all gamers, it's talking about the stereotype of gaming culture that is pandered to by the gaming industry and used as a bogeyman by mainstream media. The article is aimed at people in the gaming industry who have internalised the stereotypical gamer and think of them as the gaming audience.
Basically, replace 'gamers' with 'gamergate supporters' and you'll see the point of the article.
It's amazingly prescient to. If you read it now, it'll seem like an article that was written long after gamergate, rather than one that was written at it's birth.
The point of the article is that gamers are more than the most vocal and public examples of 'gaming culture'. Everyone plays games now, so games developers can market games to all sorts of gaming demographics and not just the stereotypical "boys who like guns and boobs".
The gaming audience is now so large that games don't have to be marketed and approved by "gamers" any more than movies have to be marketed and approved by "cineophiles".
The backlash is because she is right, and some "gamers" want to keep control of the medium, rather than accepting a smaller slice of a bigger pie as the ever-expanding industry creates many games that are not aimed at them.
EDIT: Goddamn GAF, you guys respond quickly!
'Gamers' don't have to be your audience. 'Gamers' are over
I didn't like the article at first, because I considered myself a gamer and it starts off by dismissing gamers as just teenage boys laughing about memes, and goes on to call them obtuse shit-slingers and other derogatory terms.
But after really reading it, the article is spot on.
It's not talking about all gamers, it's talking about the stereotype of gaming culture that is pandered to by the gaming industry and used as a bogeyman by mainstream media. The article is aimed at people in the gaming industry who have internalised the stereotypical gamer and think of them as the gaming audience.
Basically, replace 'gamers' with 'gamergate supporters' and you'll see the point of the article.
It's amazingly prescient to. If you read it now, it'll seem like an article that was written long after gamergate, rather than one that was written at it's birth.
The point of the article is that gamers are more than the most vocal and public examples of 'gaming culture'. Everyone plays games now, so games developers can market games to all sorts of gaming demographics and not just the stereotypical "boys who like guns and boobs".
The gaming audience is now so large that games don't have to be marketed and approved by "gamers" any more than movies have to be marketed and approved by "cineophiles".
The backlash is because she is right, and some "gamers" want to keep control of the medium, rather than accepting a smaller slice of a bigger pie as the ever-expanding industry creates many games that are not aimed at them.
EDIT: Goddamn GAF, you guys respond quickly!
Remember kids: it's only censorship if a developer decides to put a minority into their video game.
Bingo, well said. I get that these people must have so little in their lives that their whole existence is defined by this one hobby but... it's time for them to realize the hobby has outgrown them.
This is the ridiculous part. And now, any time someone claims the goober gaters are toxic and violent they respond by... stalking women or making school shooting threats. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy at this point.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
I'd say they're pretty sharp tools. Sharp in that they're causing actual harm and tools because... well Gamergate is full up tools.
quality post here. its what , many miss about the "gamers are dead" articles. its amazing how many peoples heads they flew over.
LudicrousSpeed
Member
Yup. There was a hilarious post where someone asked TechRaptor about "death of the author", and they took that phrase literally and wrote about how they didn't see authors dying out.
That is still good for a hearty laugh now and again.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Gamergate supporters are outspokenly against academia (they feel it's a breeding grounds for feminist ideologies). So it comes as no surprise they fail to understand concepts like 'Death of the Author'.
QuantumZebra
Member
Its not surprising that GG intersects so well with right-wing ideologies... both very fearful of change, distrusting of academics, paranoid of government involvement/conspiracies, etc...
Very heavily fear/ignorance-based mindsets
Part of me has internalized the Zoe situation as "she had sex with the wrong person at the wrong time" and that she was just severely unlucky to have spawned a hate movement and all of the ridiculous subsequent harassment. But as this drags on and on, I realized something scary: if it wasn't Zoe, it would have been somebody else. It would have been another woman in the industry, no doubt, but regardless, this was going to happen no matter who the impetus was.
The combination of traditional and social media, the generally unmoderated discussion on the internet, and the increasing divide between liberalism and conservatism have created an environment where GG and other "virtual" hate groups can incubate and fester, drawing in members under both understood and false pretenses.
Back to Zoe though - she is strong. Many would have run or worse. Not that ANYONE ever deserves a fraction of what she has had to endure, but if the net result after all of this ends is a net positive and good changes come about in this industry and others, than she was the right person for the "job" that nobody in their right mind would ever ask for.
The combination of traditional and social media, the generally unmoderated discussion on the internet, and the increasing divide between liberalism and conservatism have created an environment where GG and other "virtual" hate groups can incubate and fester, drawing in members under both understood and false pretenses.
Back to Zoe though - she is strong. Many would have run or worse. Not that ANYONE ever deserves a fraction of what she has had to endure, but if the net result after all of this ends is a net positive and good changes come about in this industry and others, than she was the right person for the "job" that nobody in their right mind would ever ask for.
Similar threads
- Poll