1670

The more I think about it, the more the Fox News/Brietbart angle makes sense.

These people want to live in the simpler, golden days of past game reporting. They should band together and start up a new website in the tradition of 1997 VoodooExtreme/Evil Avatar. They can demand that no writers ever touch on progressive issues or any critical analysis of the product. I mean, other than critical analysis of supported resolutions, performance, etc.

Then they will have their own little area to get their “unbiased” news, and the rest of gaming media can move on.

Sounds to me like everyone wins in that situation.

1671

Okay, I read the article, but it seems like it’s easy to present the super-obvious counter argument in similar fashion:

It’s annoying to have a perspective dismissed because it’s not from the “target demographic”. It’s annoying to be unable to criticize games for things other than their mechanics and their underlying tech without being ripped apart for being biased. And most of all, it’s infuriatingly annoying that whenever a game is criticized for anything not having to do with performance or mechanics, people think this is criticism of the developers or the audience for the game. It isn’t. It’s criticism of the game.

Sarkeesian is able to compile those videos because she plays an enormous amount of games. People leveling these criticisms aren’t outsiders looking in, they’re game players who want to talk about a medium they love. I’m sorry it’s about topics you don’t care about? I don’t know what else to say then that.

1672

Who fucking cares that it’s civil? The opinion he’s expressing is that he doesn’t like the shitty, exclusionary behavior of his pet industry being called out and wants people who are offended to shut up because they annoy him. I don’t care if he screams it using all-caps invective or writes it in Olde English on company letterhead with a fountain pen. It’s dumb.

You seem to think that if a racist civilly says “I don’t like being called a racist, please stop, it’s annoying” over and over again that he’s earned the right to be treated with respect or taken seriously. He’s not. He’s still a piece of shit, just like this guy.

You literally think somebody saying “please stop saying you’re offended by this misogynistic, exclusionary shit, I don’t want to hear about your opinions, they are annoying and you’re going overboard with ‘political correctness’” is a valuable perspective that should be engaged and not a pathetic entitled screed that should be mocked or ignored.

1673

Creative way of refuting the suggestion that you are just trying to silence other views by just being dismissive and insulting instead of addressing the point. Meta.

Like, if you linked to an article that calmly wrote out "I think it’s ok for developers to make a game where the main character is a big-lipped, ape-ish black guy who refers NPCs as ‘master’

Again, you’re doing the exact same thing the article is complaining about. Ignoring substance, being insulting, and actually manufacturing a more vile, racist statement than any you read. Look at what you wrote, Jesus. I

I certainly wouldn’t spend any time at all trying to show you that that’s a reprehensible view from a shitlord.

Again: dismissive, vile, completely lacking in substance.

Sorry if this is too “frothing” for you to handle.

It is, but you clearly have no shame.

1674

Fine, I’ll try to write a rebuttal, though I’ll probably regret it.

In recent years, gaming journalism websites have begun to publish a multitude of articles about social justice, feminism, and racism. Many of these articles condemn the gaming community as being homophobic and bigoted. Many of these articles accuse game developers of being sexist and/or misogynistic for the content in their games. Many of these articles describe the game industry as being immature, and in need of drastic changes for the good of society.

Quite true as far as I can tell, many gaming journalism websites have indeed begun publishing such articles.

Such articles are often met with a negative reception. Nobody likes being called immature, or sexist, or misogynistic, or bigoted. Nobody likes being told that their favorite game is bad because it’s racist. Nobody likes being called immature, or sexist, or misogynistic, or bigoted. Nobody likes being told that their favorite game is bad because it’s racist.

Indeed, it is quite understandable that nobody likes being called such labels. It is also quite understandable that people are upset that their favorite games are criticized. But notice that nowhere in this article does the writer deny that the content of videogames is quite often immature, sexist, misogynistic, bigoted, homophobic, racist etc. If such a denial exists anywhere in this article, please point it out to me. As far as I can tell, the article correctly states that people are upset that these labels are applied to them and the games that they like but it does not deny that these labels are accurate.

When gamers speak out against SJW articles, they are accused of being bigots who don’t want their racist world to go away. When gamers ask journalists to review a game based on its game mechanics rather than its depiction of women, they are accused of being sexists who don’t want their misogynistic world to go away.

Game reviewers should write about game mechanics of course. If reviewers write exclusively about the said tropes, I can agree that they’re not doing a good job. But why shouldn’t reviewers not also write about the prevalence of these tropes in addition to graphics, game mechanics, user interface, music etc.? I think it would be safe to say that most people agree that critiquing the plot, characters and dialogue of a game is well within the remit of the reviewer. Shouldn’t that include these tropes too? Notice once again that the articles states that the gamers are accused of being bigots who don’t want their racist world to go away etc. but fails to address whether or not the accusation is true. Isn’t it exactly the case that these gamers do want things to stay exactly the same?

But the journalists posting these articles don’t understand the situation correctly. Gamers don’t oppose the SJW agenda because they are bigots; they oppose it because it’s annoying. It’s annoying to hear someone tell you that you must be politically correct at all times. It’s annoying to hear someone tell developers what kind of content should and should not be allowed in video games. It’s annoying to hear someone give a low score to a game because something in it offended them.

Yes, I can see how that would be annoying. But why would they find it annoying if they weren’t really bigots and actually like the content as it exists now and want it to stay the same? Are you honestly going to say things like “I’m not a sexist but I only enjoy playing as powerful male protagonists and I only like to see women in subservient roles and as sex objects. That’s just how I roll, okay?” or “I’m not a homophobe but I feel icky if a homosexual romance option exists in my RPG so get rid of it.”

Game developers should be able to develop whatever games they want. If a game developer wants their protagonist to be a white, straight, cis male, that should be okay. If a game developer wants their protagonist to be a black, lesbian, transgendered female, that should be okay, too. If a game developer wants their protagonist to be a busty girl wearing nothing more than dental floss, that should also be okay.

But it is okay. The other side isn’t calling for these games to be banned. But you should be prepared to be called out on it, sure. If your side can be annoyed about the profusion of so-called SJW articles and perhaps a slow move away from the tropes that they most familiar with, the other side can also be annoyed by those who continue to thoughtlessly fall back on these tropes and express themselves accordingly. Remember however that while both sides are free to express their opinions, only one of these two sides are hurling the rape and murder threats.

1675

You’re reaching a bit here. There’s still a wide gulf between the stereotypical oblivious privileged person who thinks we’re post-whateverism, and an actual bigot.

For my part, I was deeply annoyed because I first read all this stuff at RPS, and those British guys use a lot of adverbs when they get emotional. I won’t tolerate adverb abuse, darn it!

If your side can be annoyed about the profusion of so-called SJW articles and perhaps a slow move away from the tropes that they most familiar with, the other side can also be annoyed by those who continue to thoughtlessly fall back on these tropes and express themselves accordingly.
I think this is a good reminder. It’s also a handy explanation for why everyone is annoying the hell out of each other right now.

Remember however that while both sides are free to express their opinions, only one of these two sides are hurling the rape and murder threats.
I’m not going to play the “other side does it too” game but I was pretty surprised how much the “loser virgin” card was being thrown around on Twitter when I briefly descended into it this evening. Not a friendly time right now. I have to admit: I’m very fortunate that I’m not in the middle of it.

1676

Why do you bother substituting some manufactured gibberish of your own creation, which you’d rather ridicule because it’s simple to diminish, instead of actually sticking with what he said? Are you that intellectually bankrupt?

You seem to think that if a racist civilly

Why are you immediately suggesting someone is racist? Just stop. Stick with what’s actually said and done instead of trying to diminish statements by just calling people racist, misogynist, corrupt, criminal. I don’t call you an anti-Semitic pedophile, even though you might be one. I stick with what’s actually said.

1677

Pay attention to the rest of the subject. This has already been discussed.

1678

First off, thanks for the civil, substantive response. The point (if you reread the extract you quoted in your reply) isn’t that reviewers shouldn’t write about tropes (or anything else) they dislike, it’s that readers shouldn’t be labeled racist/misogynist/homophobic when they express their own preference for game reviews that shelf politics, etc. They don’t enjoy sanctimonious lecturing, which is a legitimate position that doesn’t make them bad people or deserving of those labels.

Regarding your prior point - as you mentioned, the column doesn’t express an opinion on whether or not the videogame content deserves those labels, because that’s not the point he’s making. Whether it does, or doesn’t, nobody is required to mutely enjoy being subjected to those opinions when the subject matter has no interest to them and they don’t play video games to be lectured.

The reviewer is certainly entitled to express those opinions on whether a game has misogynist content, etc., and readers should be equally entitled to either disagree with them or (more importantly, as the column argues) express their preference for excluding that analysis in reviews – just like they’re free to express their preference for less analysis of “screen resolution” or a desire for more consideration of the multiplayer features. That doesn’t make them “racist” or “sexist” any more than it makes them Luddites and cavemen for wanting less discussion of whether a game supports 4k resolution well.

But why would they find it annoying if they weren’t really bigots

I think I covered that above, but to reiterate and supplement what I said; because it’s not a topic that interests them at all, and it’s annoying to be lectured and told what’s good for you when you solely view games as escapism. Especially when you may think the analysis is smug, puerile, misguided, and often insufferably stupid. That’s just not a jolly good time for many people.

I know it’s difficult to believe, given your apparent passion for the topic, but trying to redress perceived social wrongs by advocating the covering up pixelated female breasts is uninteresting, fruitless and stupid to many people. That doesn’t make them bigots. It may even make them more grounded in reality and likely makes them less dull at parties.

while both sides are free to express their opinions, only one of these two sides are hurling the rape and murder threats.

Those threats and all criminal behavior are reprehensible. Conservative women are constantly subjected to similar threats and bigotry in social media, just for expressing their views. No ‘side’ has a monopoly on vile, possibly criminal, behavior, and I don’t agree that there’s only 2 sides without greatly conflating issues.

The reality is motivations and criticisms are more diverse, which is another reason trying to diminish contrary views by assigning them derogatory labels, often in order to justify ignoring what’s actually said, is so disheartening and frustrating.

1679

Congrats, buddy. Candidate for the most meaningless retort in QtT history.

You have said nothing of substance, whatsoever, and when repeatedly called upon that conduct you just continuously bleat that you have, like an impotent mantra you’ve adopted and now cherish.

1680

This makes me feel you don’t understand what’s being criticized here. That’s not the point anybody is making, and it’s a simplification of the subject as big as you claim the critics are doing.

Not a monopoly, but at least a huge marketshare, I would think. I might be wrong, but I’d like you to point me to a similarly sized and intense attack on a conservative woman in gaming (since that’s what we are discussing here, gaming). This whole the other side also does it defense sounds unfounded, but maybe it’s true. I just haven’t seen any evidence it’s as predominant with the roles flipped.

1681

Zoe Quinn has been doing a little investigative journalism of her own.

1682

Where has she done any investigation or journalism? She uses an irc chat log from September 2nd with people talking about needing to get into her emails, as proof that these people hacked her weeks before the chat log.
That’s only one example, but there’s nothing interesting in this - aside from more desperate attempts at playing the victim from ZQ.

All it shows us that people off 4chan had a public IRC channel about this stuff where they talked shit. That’s all she has, and she tries to extrapolate it into a huge amount of things while namedropping that the FBI are involved, that she’s filed police reports etc.

‘Yes, I may have misrepresented what you were saying and doing Ex Boyfriend, but who cares that I essentially lied because what you did and said didn’t stop the harassment’

1683

I’m trying hard to understand what she is trying to say, and her brief ironical tags on all the screenshots aren’t much help. There’s one guy who said “we need to crack ZQ emails lol”, which might have shown criminal intent without the “lol”. Apart from that, it’s the documentation of a nicely organized political campaign. None of these people are harassing, insulting or even contacting her; they’re all about spin-doctoring the public perception of these events in a way to do maximal damage to the credibility of Quinn’s camp. Does Quinn think one can deflect such a campaign merely by pointing out that it exists or where it originated?

1684

I’m still quite surprised at how the ex-boyfriend’s behavior seems to be largely ignored by all sides. The blog posts that started all this really are quite disturbing.

1685

You must be joking. The first week from one side was all about the ex-boyfriend’s behaviour - and it’s still a recurring theme. Even in this thread.

1686

I think the point is that a lot of people jumped on this because they were against politics in games at all. Realizing they’ve been played by what you (accurately) call a nicely organized political campaign might have an effect. Or not, who knows. I’ll guess we’ll see soon what happens.

Other than that, the tweets do show people intending on harming and harassing a person (although not showing if they actually did), which, if it happened, is quite damning. Again, I think in some jurisdictions this might be actually a criminal offense (like bullying is).

But yes, I agree her ironical tags do not help at all to make it understandable (or relatable).

1687

I laughed at the enthusiastic, “let’s put our backs into it boys!” attitude they’ve got, like they’re pushing a stuck car out of snow, or something. People love being on a team.

1688

From here it felt like the story went far beyond Zoe Quinn after a few days.

I think I like this better than my “thrill of the hunt” theory.

1689

Ah yes, of course, racism is just like having scantily-clad females in videogames! I’ve got it now!