504 réponses à ce sujet

[Jorji Costava]

TL;DR WARNING IN EFFECT: So I know that if there were a "downvote" system on these forums, this post would probably set the all time record, but I'm just going to upchuck my take on Gamergate here anyways.

I'll start by making a deal with GGers: I'll concede that the vast majority of GGers are honest folks who are participating in the movement in good faith, and aren't a bunch of harassing trolls out to kill Anita Sarkeesian; or more specifically, I'll concede this if they're willing to concede that 'SJWs' aren't a monolithic group all of whom are out to take away your games, and portray all gamers as virginal losers living in their mom's basements. Can we agree that #not all (insert your preferred group here)?

Looking at the history of GG, I just don't believe that it began as a movement in favor of journalistic ethics. There's a reason it started out as "Quinnspiracy" and not "Ubisoft-spiracy," or even "Grayson-spiracy"; it's telling that Nathan Grayson, the journalist originally accused of corruption, has been relatively untouched by GG as compared with Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian or Brianna Wu (none of whom are actually journalists). Even Angry Joe has acknowledged that the Quinnspiracy constitutes the wellspring from which GG spawned (which again, doesn't mean GGers are all sexist; it simply means they have incorrect information about their movement).

From its beginning, GG has done itself few favors, with a significant percentage of its theories turning out to be utterly unsubstantiated. The original such theory was that Zoe Quinn slept with a game journalist in order to secure a favorable review for her game; it turns out that Nathan Grayson never reviewed Depression Quest (which is free by the way; that already makes it hard to see this as a consumer issue). There was the claim that Anita Sarkeesian was a PUA, but this was debunked. In fact, it was debunked on the very article which made the accusation (see the correction at the end, in which the author is forced to basically repudiate his entire article). A few GGer's accused Anita Sarkeesian of fabricating her story about contacting authorities in an August 26th tweet; this was later debunked. And so on.

It didn't help that a substantial number of extreme right-wing figures glommed onto GamerGate, including Milo Yiannopoulos, the man who initially disclosed the GameJournoPros mailing list. Milo wrote this lovely piece on gamers in 2013; in a tweet on May 14, 2014, he attempted to directly link Elliot Rodger's killing spree to his fascination with games. There are also GG supporters like the PUA Roosh V, and far-right ethno-nationalist Davis Aurini (who has a video explaining that "American women are the most decadent sluts since the fall of Rome."). I'm not claiming that these guys are the 'leaders' of GG; most GGers probably haven't even heard of them. But something about this pattern of far-right commentators attaching themselves to GG suggests that they sensed the anti-feminist, anti-progressive undercurrents running through much of GG.

I get that the spate of "Gamers are Dead" opinion pieces was dumb and propelled GG past the Quinnspiracy; SJW's pissed away any good will they might have had among gamers with those articles. Even abstracting away from what they say about gamers, they're just not good on any level (Golding's piece, particular, is nothing but a series of re-statements of his original thesis that gamers are 'over,' with no actual argument to be found). And yes, a lot of folks (like the writers of SVU) have been opportunistic in using GG to take cheap pot shots at people who play games, but at the end of the day, I just don't think GG is the best way to express these concerns. Pretty much every voice in nerd and gaming culture that I respect (Film Crit Hulk, MrBTongue, Errant Signal, and even Angry Joe, who's been critical of both sides) has come out against it, and while I can respect fair-minded people who've embraced GG, I just can't follow them.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Sure. Being on the BioWare forums, we're probably in the minority anyway. I have no problems with people who disagree with me as long as they carry themselves respectfully, like you have.

[SlottsMachine]

I think you just threw that downvote line in there to trick me into reading your post. Mission Accomplished. 

 

 

Here's your downvote. 

 

 

But anyways, I don't know much about all this drama (other than what has been posted here), and I don't care to either.  

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

I think you just threw that downvote line in there to trick me into reading your post. Mission Accomplished. 

 

 

Here's your downvote. 

 

Reported.

 

Spoiler

When will you learn, Slotts?

[SlottsMachine]

Dayum!!! 

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

Check out this previous portrayal of gamers on SVU.

 

 

Game...game never changes.

 

Speaking of which, say you're someone who owns a game journalist outlet, and you see the backlash SVU has caused. You realize that the narrative you helped push and promote about gamers these past months may be rubbing the publishers and developers, who you owe considerably for all them early access bribes you took for your clickbait articles, aren't happy and are starting to voice their disapproval of how you've handled the situation.

 

What do you do? Do you apologize for your promoting a damaging image to all of gaming? Do you post retractions and keep your mouth shut? Do you even try to hold your ground while being diplomatic?

 

Nope. **** on everyone for stuff you've deflected, and shift blame like its water in a sinking raft.

 

[General TSAR]

Hey E-Ro, yeah it was a serious episode. You'll love this-

 

S.T.A.L.K.E.R, MGR:R, Command and Conquer: Tiberium Sun, Dark Souls, Valkyria Chronicles + many, many other great games teaming up against media stupidity.

 

I approve. 

[LPPrince]

S.T.A.L.K.E.R, MGR:R, Command and Conquer: Tiberium Sun, Dark Souls and Valkyria Chronicles + many, many others teaming up against media stupidity.

 

I approve. 

 

Brownie points if you can name all of them

[Seboist]

SJW's pissed away any good will they might have had among gamers 

 

Lol, what kind of a joke is this? They pissed away any good will they had with gamers with their neo-puriticanal and totalitarian nature. They want to turn video games into their own propaganda tool and dictate what are acceptable themes,characters,stories,etc to devs via clickbait troll articles and riling up social media lynchmobs(which has backfired on them in an number of cases like with Hatred and Dragon's Crown).

 

Funny how you label Milo a right wing "extremist" (whom has repented for his pre-GG pieces on gaming) and think these Stalinist Justice Wankers(whom have no qualms with ruining people's livelihoods) have any "good" will towards gamers. Sounds like something a left wing extremist would say...

 

Oh and I like how you conveniently left out the bit about the mass censorship in various sites from the gamejournospros relating to the Quinn story, which is what propelled the great interest in it, on top of "gamers are dead"(great way of them to show there's no collusion and corruption in game media). Fact of the matter is, if there was no mass censorship and some attempts at (in)sincere apologies, "gamergate" wouldn't have lasted beyond a week, but there's a reason why "pride" is listed as a deadly sin.

[SmilesJA]

Sigh.....

 

A few years ago we have joined together to take down Jack Thompson, Glenn Beck and other people who slandered us and our medium. When I first saw the numerous videos, essays coming from gamers from different color, age, religion and gender defending our games and culture against the men and women who tried to censor games and convince the public that video games caused violence and gamers were nothing more than ruthless psychopaths playing "murder simulators. I was shocked, to see how united we were. Despite what platform we played, despite all of the fanboy wars, when our games were threatened;  We joined together as brothers and sisters to stand up against the corrupt media that was defaming us and the games we've played. I thought this was a new begining, a new era that dawned on gaming. That games can appeal to different people, that no matter what race, religion whatever, if you played games you were treated like an equal. It's not perfect and there are definitely some awful people out there in the gaming community. However I thought, we finally broken the stereotype that gamers are not a bunch of overweight white men that were portrayed on television. Even if gamers were portrayed that way, it was treated with a laugh, knowing that stereotype wasn't true whereas before it was treated seriously, by some people.

 

Now here we are today, with the whole "gamers are dead" articles. The insane protection that someone like Anita gets by the gaming media. Anita herself (I feel she has good intentions, but I seriously felt that her labeling her critics as people not letting women inside "the boys club" contributed to how badly gamers were on that episode.) and now this conflict know as "Gamergate" that pretty much set the gaming community on fire. Now people whom once stood up against Jack Thompson and his ilk are now lambasting Gamergaters. Calling them: Terrorists, rapists, white racists. No matter how much Gamergate, tried to show that they were diverse or that they condemn harassement. Someone would twist their words or ignore them. The media showing one (extremely biased.) about Gamergate and not even listening to Gamergaters themselves. With news pieces showing Brianna Wu, Zoe Quinn and Anita melodramatically calling gamers terroists mysoginists. There were counterpoints to their claims, it's always listen and believe! If you don't you're sexist! Not to say that Gamergate hasn't harassed people themselves. Right now the gamer reputation is in shambles (not that it was that good in the first place, but we were improving.) and it's sad that it's not because of the politcians, it's because of us.

 

I was proud to call myself a gamer (I still do.) but with the doxxing, harassment and overall cruelty that has been put on both sides combined with the hilariously awful SVU show. It is hard to call myself one now and days. If gaming culture is dead, It would because we've killed it with hypocripsy and corruption.

 

 

(This vid is pretty funny and releavant.) 

[SmilesJA]

Yeah, this whole situation and argument just seem ridiculous as far as I can see. I'm much happier basically ignoring the whole thing,

 

Good you don't need to be involved with this, but just so you know about Gamergate: "There are heroes on both sides, evil is everywhere."

[Dermain]

Somewhere out there is a Geraldo special that was largely considered the principal cause of the association between RPG gaming and satanic rituals. It was a tabloid-style exposé about how games like Dungeons and Dragons often led to satanic pacts, and suicide pacts. I think they cobbled together a couple of sensationalized stories and used all the classic techniques to make it sound like an epidemic problem.

 

I can remember my mother nervously asking me about it when she found out that I was gaming with friends.

 

Strangely, years later, when Geraldo's credibility was dragged through the ****ter, I felt a strange sense of satisfaction about it. Dunno why.

 

I still remember the Fox news special that said that the Nintendo DS' Pictochat would lead to pedophiles abducting children because it had a longer range than what Nintendo said it had.

 

The only problem being, no one used pictochat...

 

Playing as a healer gets you some bad karma brah

 

Mhm.

 

Check out this previous portrayal of gamers on SVU.

 

 

That would be one of the episodes.

[Fawx9]

TL;DR WARNING IN EFFECT: So I know that if there were a "downvote" system on these forums, this post would probably set the all time record, but I'm just going to upchuck my take on Gamergate here anyways.

I'll start by making a deal with GGers: I'll concede that the vast majority of GGers are honest folks who are participating in the movement in good faith, and aren't a bunch of harassing trolls out to kill Anita Sarkeesian; or more specifically, I'll concede this if they're willing to concede that 'SJWs' aren't a monolithic group all of whom are out to take away your games, and portray all gamers as virginal losers living in their mom's basements. Can we agree that #not all (insert your preferred group here)?

Looking at the history of GG, I just don't believe that it began as a movement in favor of journalistic ethics. There's a reason it started out as "Quinnspiracy" and not "Ubisoft-spiracy," or even "Grayson-spiracy"; it's telling that Nathan Grayson, the journalist originally accused of corruption, has been relatively untouched by GG as compared with Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeesian or Brianna Wu (none of whom are actually journalists). Even Angry Joe has acknowledged that the Quinnspiracy constitutes the wellspring from which GG spawned (which again, doesn't mean GGers are all sexist; it simply means they have incorrect information about their movement).

From its beginning, GG has done itself few favors, with a significant percentage of its theories turning out to be utterly unsubstantiated. The original such theory was that Zoe Quinn slept with a game journalist in order to secure a favorable review for her game; it turns out that Nathan Grayson never reviewed Depression Quest (which is free by the way; that already makes it hard to see this as a consumer issue). There was the claim that Anita Sarkeesian was a PUA, but this was debunked. In fact, it was debunked on the very article which made the accusation (see the correction at the end, in which the author is forced to basically repudiate his entire article). A few GGer's accused Anita Sarkeesian of fabricating her story about contacting authorities in an August 26th tweet; this was later debunked. And so on.

It didn't help that a substantial number of extreme right-wing figures glommed onto GamerGate, including Milo Yiannopoulos, the man who initially disclosed the GameJournoPros mailing list. Milo wrote this lovely piece on gamers in 2013; in a tweet on May 14, 2014, he attempted to directly link Elliot Rodger's killing spree to his fascination with games. There are also GG supporters like the PUA Roosh V, and far-right ethno-nationalist Davis Aurini (who has a video explaining that "American women are the most decadent sluts since the fall of Rome."). I'm not claiming that these guys are the 'leaders' of GG; most GGers probably haven't even heard of them. But something about this pattern of far-right commentators attaching themselves to GG suggests that they sensed the anti-feminist, anti-progressive undercurrents running through much of GG.

I get that the spate of "Gamers are Dead" opinion pieces was dumb and propelled GG past the Quinnspiracy; SJW's pissed away any good will they might have had among gamers with those articles. Even abstracting away from what they say about gamers, they're just not good on any level (Golding's piece, particular, is nothing but a series of re-statements of his original thesis that gamers are 'over,' with no actual argument to be found). And yes, a lot of folks (like the writers of SVU) have been opportunistic in using GG to take cheap pot shots at people who play games, but at the end of the day, I just don't think GG is the best way to express these concerns. Pretty much every voice in nerd and gaming culture that I respect (Film Crit Hulk, MrBTongue, Errant Signal, and even Angry Joe, who's been critical of both sides) has come out against it, and while I can respect fair-minded people who've embraced GG, I just can't follow them.

 

 

First off, thanks for not being one of the crazies swinging a baseball bat with the words misogynist shitlord on it. 

 

The main point I want to address is the fact that the well intended GGer's are blind to the beginning of this mess. We aren't. I myself didn't hear about it until after the GAD articles on an isolated message board. So I looked it up, and discovered the a whole bunch of **** throwing. After a few weeks I found myself gravitating towards pro-gg. People owned up to the fact that there was bad **** done and tried to fix it. They did this by tracking down the Anita stalker, mass reporting doxing and threats, setting up networks to get word out if something bad was happening. None of this was acknowledged nor was the harassment of members in GG. The good people who were clearly the majority of the movement at this point were being constantly thrown under the rug just so the journalists and the friends could save face. 

 

Nothing can undo the unfortunate things that have happened, but I sure as hell wont let the good people's actions be erased by some bullshit narrative. As such I'm with Oliver Campbell and Mark Kern on this. http://www.twitlonge.../show/n_1skpnrt. Own your ****, work together to clean it and lets move on. 

[Jorji Costava]

Lol, what kind of a joke is this? They pissed away any good will they had with gamers with their neo-puriticanal and totalitarian nature. They want to turn video games into their own propaganda tool and dictate what are acceptable themes,characters,stories,etc to devs via clickbait troll articles and riling up social media lynchmobs(which has backfired on them in an number of cases like with Hatred and Dragon's Crown).

How do "clickbat troll articles" and "social media lynchmobs" constitute a form of totalitarianism? Sounds like straightforward exercises of freedom of speech and freedom of association to me. It's not like any of these people are recommending state action to ban these games.
 

Funny how you label Milo a right wing "extremist" (whom has repented for his pre-GG pieces on gaming) and think these Stalinist Justice Wankers(whom have no qualms with ruining people's livelihoods) have any "good" will towards gamers. Sounds like something a left wing extremist would say...

I'm aware that Milo apologized; I'm just not convinced it reflects anything deeper than the possibility that he just hates feminists more than he hates gamers, and Gamergate gave him a platform to express that.
 

Oh and I like how you conveniently left out the bit about the mass censorship in various sites from the gamejournospros relating to the Quinn story, which is what propelled the great interest in it, on top of "gamers are dead"(great way of them to show there's no collusion and corruption in game media). Fact of the matter is, if there was no mass censorship and some attempts at (in)sincere apologies, "gamergate" wouldn't have lasted beyond a week, but there's a reason why "pride" is listed as a deadly sin.

Sure, there are plent of left-leaning types who have genuine good will toward gamers. I'd include myself among them. I've been playing PC games for a pretty long time, and I don't see that as fundamentally opposed to my political inclinations. Here are a few of the more fair-minded pieces for you to chew on; I don't agree with everything they say, but they're all interesting nonetheless:

"Reclaiming 'Gamer' and Defending Our Tribe"

 

Film Crit Hulk - "On Despair, Quitting, and GamerGate"

 

"To Fair-Minded Proponents of Gamergate"

 

As far as "mass censorship," that strikes me as a highly overwrought term. Keep in mind that the entire basis of the Gamergate story at that point centered on Zoe Quinn's sex life; there are legitimate ethical concerns whenever you're dealing with information about a person's private life, and without disclosing that information, there was no story at all. In fact, even with that information, there was little to no story at all. As I mentioned before, it was a lot of fuss to raise over a relationship between a game developer and a journalist who did not review her free game. The cost-benefit analysis of running this story was borderline from the start.

 

Concerning the "Gamers Are Over" articles, I don't think the GameJournoPros mailing list is particularly revealing here. Devin Wilson, Luke Plunkett, Joseph Bernstein, Patrick O'Rourke, Arthur Chu, Dan Golding, Keith Stuart and Mike Pearl are not on the list. That accounts for seven of the the ten "Gamers are Over" articles I know of. It's probably more a matter of like-minded people thinking similar thoughts in response to the same event, and "Gamers are Over" being a sexier title than "Harassment from a minority of gamers needs to stop."

 

EDIT: Added a link.

[SmilesJA]

 

 

Concerning the "Gamers Are Over" articles, I don't think the GameJournoPros mailing list is particularly revealing here. Devin Wilson, Luke Plunkett, Joseph Bernstein, Patrick O'Rourke, Arthur Chu, Dan Golding, Keith Stuart and Mike Pearl are not on the list. That accounts for seven of the the ten "Gamers are Over" articles I know of. It's probably more a matter of like-minded people thinking similar thoughts in response to the same event, and "Gamers are Over" being a sexier title than "Harassment from a minority of gamers needs to stop."

 

I really don't think those articles were posted by coincidence. 

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

 

Happy coincidence lol. But I'll try to type up a decent response to all of that.

[SmilesJA]

I really don't want this thread to be locked, so how about that SVU episode people?

[Fawx9]

I really don't want this thread to be locked, so how about that SVU episode people?

 

 

I'm still laughing at the light board being hacked. I know these writers don't know anything about technology, but they should at least understand that 2 machines need to be connected for them to interact. 

[leighzard]

 

-.-

No!!! You're kidding!

Zelda was a large portion of my childhood.  Am I a racists, sexist db now?

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

No!!! You're kidding!

Zelda was a large portion of my childhood.  Am I a racists, sexist db now?

 

Oh you simple people can't realize it easily...

 

Zelda's face is classist, sexist and racist. It's been all implied but you couldn't understand. You're all the victims of Zelda Propaganda.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

No!!! You're kidding!
Zelda was a large portion of my childhood.  Am I a racists, sexist db now?

Yes, you are everything and worse. You are doubly sexist if you've played Pokemon.

[LPPrince]

I really don't want this thread to be locked, so how about that SVU episode people?

 

It was terrible. Its that simple really.

[Jock Cranley]

It was terrible. Its that simple really.

 

If by terrible you mean freakin hilarious.

[Cainhurst Crow]

This episode was "Mazes and Monsters" if you threw out any sanity from the script, and got rid of the hilarity of seeing Tom Hanks act like a delusional weirdo.

 

It is so bad, that much like a micheal bay movie, it transcendes the boundaries of bad art, propells so far past being "so bad it's good" and "so bad its funny", and comes right back around on the spectrum to "total, unapologetic, scat-on-film".