It’s amazing Virgil is still alive. (s)he’s probably just going to keel over one day after eating nothing but radishes for 8 months straight after determining that the other Brassicaceae plants were over-privileged, fish were sociopaths racists, consuming milk was fostering offensive gender roles, mushrooms were too fun and tolerant, while pork was too damned white. Some madness is just not sustainable.
Alstein
3202
Where I think a reasonable consensus lies: The issue is to fight abusive behavior no matter where it comes from. Why is a death threat against say, Brad ok when one against Anita/Brianna isn’t? (and yes, I’ve heard people say that outside of here). As for games, the best way to make them better is an open marketplace where a more diverse community will build up organically through the laws of the free market. (And there has been proof of this- folks can make a living with games that cater to women)
As for Al Sharpton, the Ferguson protestors didn’t want him either- they felt he was just trying to cash in.
As for the person I mentioned earlier- she’s been abused and attacked by the social justice crowd herself- so she holds a bit of a grudge. Why I think she might have slanted things- but it was true that devs said they love twitch because it means interacting with customers directly instead of through a problematic media.
That would be a weird position to take. Sorry if I am not convinced a non-insane person said anything like that.
Why I think she might have slanted things- but it was true that devs said they love twitch because it means interacting with customers directly instead of through a problematic media.
This makes no sense to me at all. In what context are they interacting through twitch that they would have previously used “problematic media”? I am… baffled. I mean I understand using twitch to communicate with customers, lots of companies do that now, but what the heck does that have to do with games journalism?
Alstein
3204
Well, on the first part, the whole non-insane is the issue. These folks are an insane lunatic fringe. Problem is their outsized influence through harassment. The crazy is just breeding like mad these days.
As for the second part- could be a bunch of reasons. One possible reason: they think most gamers who would buy their product now disregard or distrust the gaming media? It could also be that twitch is cheaper/easier to get the message out.
I know in my case- if it’s from a print mag and it’s about a AAA game, I pretty much assume the review was bought and paid for these days. The main reason I hang around forums these days is to kill time, and it’s the only real place for me to get unastroturfed ideas about a game.
Well, it’s a lot cheaper to run a stream out of your own office to demo a game than it is to fly a few dozen journos out, rent a space, provide food and make sure each one gets hands on plus time for questions. Lots of the big sites are less interested in doing preview coverage anyway, but most will happily run “See two hours of gameplay for unreleased title X on Twitch!” stories about your stream anyway. You also don’t have to risk some shitty twat with a chip on his shoulder writing up something extremely petty about your game, whether its about “Social Justice” or not.
“After the demo at Gametechstudios they had a buffet that contained some Mexican dishes. How dare white people culturally appropriate the food of non-whites! I spent all night comforting my colleague from the Verge after she experienced PTSD at the sight of a white cishet male eating a tostada and I can’t remember what their game was due to my rage at these racist shitlords, but I’m giving it 1 out of 10.”
Uh, so exactly what I said. Nobody be mean to anyone(and if anyone is mean, dismiss it as “everyone gets death threats” and the abusers are a lunatic fringe that just randomly selects targets, oh except that some SJWs condone death threats against Brad), and then just hope things get better on their own while literally denying that a problem exists.
NOTE, however, while even as this completely ignores the pre-existing societal problems of sexism and racism(remember those?) to focus on how your BFFsies on this forum are sobbing over my vicious trolling…
It also doesn’t seem to address their putative issues! What does this consensus do to stop some other person from asking for a black avatar? What does this consensus do to stop people from writing feminist critiques of video games?
The issue is NOT to fight abusive behavior, you’ve completely accepted #GGers frame of the issue(again! Constantly! What a friend to the LGBT community you are). This tone policing bullshit is not the real issue, the real issue for SJWs is SOCIAL JUSTICE. Your consensus solves YOUR problem(“Mommy and Daddy are fighting!”), but if we pretend #GamerGate has real concerns it doesn’t solve them at all, nor does it solve my issues with video gaming culture.
Mommy is still drinking too much and Daddy keeps fucking his secretary, but as long as they act nice at the dinner table we can fix this marriage, right?
As for Al Sharpton, the Ferguson protestors didn’t want him either- they felt he was just trying to cash in.
Jesus Christ. It’s the #actually Olympics in here.
I understand the idea that it is a cheaper replacement for exclusive preview coverage for journalists, but the effect is the opposite of what you are saying; you are MUCH MORE likely to have previews/reviews that are dominated by the specific biases of the blogger/indie games writer/enraged fan.
On the one hand you are handpicking specific writers to preview your game, on the other hand you are literally allowing the entire internet to get in on that. Which do you honestly think would work out better?
Aleck
3210
At the same time, you can bypass the writers altogether and go directly to your audience. That’s what releasing this stuff directly on twitter and youtube does – it essentially removes the (outside) editorial voice and allows the audience direct access to the information the publisher wants to share.
Personally my problem with this approach is that the information the publisher/developer wants to share is going to be a very jaundiced and biased look, and I would prefer to run that stuff through the filter of a trusted reviewer/journalist so that you get a somewhat more neutral look. At least, that’s the ideal with journalism. In practice it doesn’t always work that way.
And Soapy, I think the entire internet ends up commenting on anything (and everything) anyway. From a publisher perspective, at least you get to put your spin on it from the outset.
And people find out about by word of mouth? I dunno. I can’t really see it.
I like preview footage and let’s plays, for sure, but generally i am only going to be going to watch stuff I have already been turned on to in other places or stuff that I am already anticipating. I still rely on written reviews/previews for everything else.
steve
3212
That’s because you’re probably over 25 (or some other age). A large majority of younger people rely exclusively on video and sharing.
Word-of-mouth is like sharing on Facebook; ask Buzzfeed if that’s a viable way to get noticed.
Alstein
3213
For mass-market, AAA games, the traditional media works.
For other games, are you really going to trust a games reviewer who doesn’t know the genre for the most part? Take, say, fighting games. Lab Zero once had 30 game reviewers look at Skullgirls. Only 2 could do the most basic of special moves (quarter circle forward on the joystick). Would any of those reviewers be able to give a decent review on the game? Or take GalCiv3, would someone who exclusively plays and enjoys mainstream games like GalCiv3?
This is why for many gamers, the gaming media is not very valuable, so when they have an unpopular opinion, it’s very easy for those folks to end up vilified.
Nesrie
3214
I realize I am also part of the over 25 crowd, but it seems like Twitch is as nitch as they come. I mean there are a number of gamers out there that don’t following much gaming media and barely even know what Twitch is. At least places like IGN, MMORPG, PC Gamer, they have a presence on non-gaming sites like Facebook, could actually reach that group. Again, I know I must be part of some aging minority, but I would never know a game even exists if they’re presence was on Twitch and YouTube and nothing else. Steam is so cluttered now, I ignore most of the release there because it seems like half are EA which I don’t care about.
LockerK
3215
Amazon bought Twitch for $970 million, and it’s integrated with both the Xbox One and PS4. It’s very much not a niche part of the market.
Honestly, it doesn’t matter what they write. People will click through to the stream or archive and watch for themselves. Why do I care what someone else thinks of the stream when I can experience exactly what they did? You don’t have to take anyone’s word for it anymore.
I just want to object to this representation of the Anti-GG crowd in the strongest possible terms.
Here are some tweets that a particular, outspoken female GamerGate supporter has been receiving by some of the anti-GamerGate crowd : https://twitter.com/_icze4r/status/555626618001952769
The Anti-GamerGate crowd are every bit as guilty of harassment as the GamerGate crowd are.
Here is a quote from an anti-GamerGate member to her : “When you give birth to your next daughter I will rape her fresh out of your pussy then flush her down the toilet.”
The problem is that the mainstream gaming media who are very quick to stir up hatred and bile against the GamerGate movement would never report on just how toxic their own movement is. Thanks to sites like Rockpapershotgun, Kotaku and Polygon the mainstream coverage is very one-sided.
I doubt that very much. The volume of harassment against the main targets of GG is overwhelming in nature and well documented at this point.
But the point is not that there are no idiots, assholes and homicidal lunatics who are anti-GG. The point is that ignoring harassment and threats entirely, Gamergate’s OBJECTIVE is to silence critics and reviewers of video games for reasons that are basically arbitrary. Anti-Gamergate doesn’t even have an obejctive… it’s just a reaction to the anti-free speech agenda of Gamergate. To be anti-GG you dont have to agree with feminism or social justice or any of those things, you just have to agree that feminists and social justice types have a right to speak and express their optinions, which includes allowing them to criticize games and other media we like.
edit: also it’s absurd to classify anti-GG as a “movement” it isn’t. It is simple rejection of GG’s goals & methods.
It is a bit naive to suggest that the anti-GamerGate crew doesn’t have an objective. Their objective is to frame the GamersGate movement as a bunch of misogynist man children instead of confronting the very valid issues that they raise.
If you step back and look at the situation from a neutral perspective aren’t you concerned at how easily you brushed aside that truly toxic harassment I just linked to because it was targeted at a demographic you don’t agree with. What would your reaction have been if those tweets had been aimed at Anita Sarkeesian?
Also, you way that GG is trying to harass and silence their critic. What about the likes of Ben Kutchera calling for journalists to be fired because they have supported GG? Or RPS, Kotaku and Polygon journalists and editors effectively attempting to blacklist journalists who support GG?
The reality is that neither side of the debate are above reproach.
What are these very valid issues, and what do those issues have to do with Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian?
If you step back and look at the situation from a neutral perspective aren’t you concerned at how easily you brushed aside that truly toxic harassment I just linked to because it was targeted at a demographic you don’t agree with. What would your reaction have been if those tweets had been aimed at Anita Sarkeesian?
My reaction is the same either way. Disgust. And I do not brush aside the harassment, I brush aside the notion that the one loon you found going off on twitter is part of an “anti-gamergate movement” that you believe exists and balances out people being driven from their homes, and scads of evidence of organized harassment campaigns against specific people.
Also, you way that GG is trying to harass and silence their critic. What about the likes of Ben Kutchera calling for journalists to be fired because they have supported GG? Or RPS, Kotaku and Polygon journalists and editors effectively attempting to blacklist journalists who support GG?
Well this is the first I have heard of it, even the venerable playingwithknives did not find this piece of skullduggery and post it here. I’m not doubting you, per se, but it really is the first I’ve heard of it. It seems pretty straightforward to me that people should not be blacklisted for political reasons.
The reality is that neither side of the debate are above reproach.
People are assholes as has been mentioned in this very thread; but nothing positive has come out of Gamergate, so it’s hard to be pro-GG in any real way.
