Not to mention that's it's the exact opposite of what he claims to be trying to do, which is to calm the waters and demand respect and humane treatment for everyone involved. Calling someone a terrible person or insane because you disagree with their review is the opposite of calming things or being reasonable.
#GAMERGATE: The Threadening [Read the OP] -- #StopGamerGate2014
- Thread starter besada
- Start date
- Status
Not to mention that's it's the exact opposite of what he claims to be trying to do, which is to calm the waters and demand respect and humane treatment for everyone involved. Calling someone a terrible person or insane because you disagree with their review is the opposite of calming things or being reasonable.
Arthur Gies giving Bayonetta 2 a 7.5 because he is uncomfortable with the main character is no different than Roger Ebert giving The Skin I LIve In 3 stars. Ebert felt the movie was brilliantly written, directed, shot and acted but the subject matter was awful. He felt the subject matter was 2 stars the execution a perfect four stars so he met in the middle at 3 stars which I find perfectly acceptable even if I would have given it 4.
I stepped out of this thread a few days ago but saw the huge jump in posts since then and, against my better judgement, came back in to see what could have possibly exploded to cause this.
The last 10 pages or whatever reads like parody.
Also regarding that tweet, I'm sorry but you're not allowed to preach about being kind and inclusive as your goal and then turn around and be mean and insulting about someone because you disagree with them about Bayonetta.
There are more to games than just mechanics.
Someone who still liked the game enough to give it a high 7.5 score is "the worst kind of person" for having some content in the game negatively affect their enjoyment? That's the kind of "ethics" people are fighting for? What a joke.
The last 10 pages or whatever reads like parody.
Also regarding that tweet, I'm sorry but you're not allowed to preach about being kind and inclusive as your goal and then turn around and be mean and insulting about someone because you disagree with them about Bayonetta.
There are more to games than just mechanics.
Someone who still liked the game enough to give it a high 7.5 score is "the worst kind of person" for having some content in the game negatively affect their enjoyment? That's the kind of "ethics" people are fighting for? What a joke.
partyphone
Banned
yeah but Arthur is a noted Xbox fanboy and DRM apologist of course he would be unfairly harsh on a Wii U exclusive, etc, etc.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
Saying something is sexualized is 'sjw' talk, and thus, something they want eradicated form the industry.
Gamergate is, and has always been, a campaign to eradicate social issues discussions or themes from the games industry.
Lalalandia
Member
GG has an identity that has been forged by that minority of hateful bigots, I wish there were ways to reform things that bigots latch onto but it's really difficult. The example of soccer hooliganism has been brought up many times here and for a time 'soccer fan = hooligan' was an accepted prejudice in the UK. It took literally billions of dollars in infrastructure and education to separate the hooligan from the fan so that now most folks are happy to say 'I'm a football fan'.
Where the analogy breaks down is that being a football hooligan required access to stadia and matches which technology and money denied them access too. Separating the gamers concerned about ethics from the gamers concerned about 'SJWs taking our games' would be much harder. The tools are the same for both sides and Twitter/Facebook/etc are unwilling to make the investment necessary to prevent anon abuse of their platforms (not a universal bad after all a lot of political campaigns in repressive nations rely on these same features).
I come back to the same position I've had on GG from day one that it can't be saved as the trolls created the hashtag and will always claim ownership. There was an attempt early on to try and persuade folks to use #GameEthics but a concerted effort to portray that as 'selling out' seems to have succeeded and it died a death. Oddly that concerted effort means that the very poisonous elements that are tarring the GG brand would be highly unlikely to follow the normal majority if they adopted that tag.
This is where a lot of the pressure on Boogie is coming from, those who see GG as ultimately tainted see Boogie as the best hope of detaching those who have concerns around ethics but deplore the GG abuse. Most other prominent GGers do not seem to be the type to even care that GG has an awful reputation and indeed seem to treat that as a badge of honour 'They hate us, we must be doing some thing right!'.
More_Badass
Member
What a jerk
BlastProcessing
Member
I will say that The Escapist's actions have severely damaged my respect for their integrity, maybe irreparably so. Conversely, your behaviour has impressed. It would be shame for all this to shake out with you leaving.
What a jerk
You know...because women are so jealous and catty...
benicillin
Banned
What a jerk
Remember everyone, this is 100% about ethics in journalism.
Nice way to start a dialog specifically for the purpose of finding common ground Milo. Jeez.
That's a fucking review, there's nothing "corrupty" here.
does Gies know Kamiya personnally or something?
Is that the same stupidity of people crying "nepotism" at anything earlier in gg?
On top of people does gg also intend on pushing the english language into suiciding itself or something?
santeesioux
Member
Giantbomb got smeared for some reason though.
This medium will never grow the fuck up when its participants are incapable of handling or processing divergent opinions or perspectives. That to me drives the nexus of this horseshit - ignoring the extremely blatant piggy-backing by men's rights groups and social conservatives.
To call someone a "horrible person" because of a fucking videogame review is childish behavior.
Somehow the film community and books community are able to survive even with strong ass opinions across the board.
Maturity isn't a grim storyline. Maturity is understanding that your perspective is not the sole perspective.
To call someone a "horrible person" because of a fucking videogame review is childish behavior.
Somehow the film community and books community are able to survive even with strong ass opinions across the board.
Maturity isn't a grim storyline. Maturity is understanding that your perspective is not the sole perspective.
It's so weird. Finding that something lessens his experience, commenting and explaining it in the review is exactly what a reviewer should do. It's no different from when Mark Kermode rails against sexism in Michael Bay films or the consumerism in the Sex and The City films. I can't even see how this in anyway can be construed as an ethics issue. And it's disappointing (but unfortunately not surprising) to see both Totalbiscuit and Boogie condemning someone's opinion for simply being different than theirs.
Having an opinion on what makes you uncomfortable isn't corruption, and most certainly doesn't make you "the worst kind of people". If a games portrayal of race, sex or politics lessen the enjoyment of your experience than that is valid criticism. The entire thing about how feminism warps the games media and by extension the games industry is just so weird especially since one of the most influential pieces of feminist film criticism is about as old as commercial video games, yet we still get films pandering (almost exclusively) to men. Feminist critique is not going to take your games away, critiquing the way women are portrayed isn't going to take your games away, scaring away the game developers and journalists from the industry via harassment campaigns will take your games away.
Urgh, I want to talk more about the sexual politics of Bayonetta but I had to bail on the sexualtisation thread once someone actually said "if you have ever watched porn you can't criticise Bayonetta" (slightly paraphrased).
And to do this less than four hours after claiming that honest and civil discourse is the motivating factor behinh #GG. Somehow you can simultaneously want ethics in gaming journalism but call gaming journalists horrible people for sharing their opinions on a game. I don't know an industry where that would be ethical.
It's absolutely mind-boggling, and really cements my belief that a lot of these people have never had any exposure whatsoever to cultural criticism of works in any other medium. These differing perspectives should be celebrated as a mark of games' growing maturity and progression as an art form. It's a good thing that people are willing to seriously engage games in this way.
It's really so disappointing. It's the perfect storm of Gaf's Arthur Gies hate-grudge and gender-based criticism that gets this place so riled up.
They deserve each other.
I genuinely feel like the tone of this entire last few months could have been different if he hadn't come to be one of the few visible 'leaders' in the thing.
QuantumZebra
Member
If people never used the term SJW again I would be so happy.
It amazes me that people want to mock people who are trying to ensure a fair and non-prejudiced environment for people to work and play in.
Side note: the people calling Bayonetta sexist don't represent feminists or anyone else for that matter - they are just clueless.
Who is doing this? I'd like to give them my full support.
Oh, thanks for your ruling on this matter.
Been reading through the last dozen or so pages of this thread, and I really only have one question: why don't the people who are truly and seriously committed to greater ethics in game journalism just make a new hashtag?
I'm not talking about the trolls, or the MRAs, or the Adam Baldwin's of the world. They can keep GG, because it's clearly become an effective social tool for pushing forward... whatever it is that they're trying to push forward. I'm talking about people like Boogie and Jim, who have the exact same goals and motivation, but one of them is spending his time defending a hashtag from (completely justifiable) condemnation towards the worst elements of the Internet that have latched onto it, and the other is spending his time defending himself from attacks by those elements because the group's mixed motivations and resulting numbers have somehow granted it some sort of legitimacy deserving of notice.
You can't argue that #GamerGate isn't a poisoned movement at this point. Whatever the initial goal was (which, in all honesty, requires quite a bit of denial on anyone's part to believe it had positive motives coming from Baldwin), there's too much evidence of hate and harassment to say otherwise. In any other public industry on the planet, outside of maybe conservative politics, anyone who associated themselves with a movement that was so visibly malicious would be out of a job. Mega corporations and political campaigns have been torpedoed by far, far less.
This thread is devoted more to the discussion of what #GamerGate means than articulating solutions to the problems it purports to be rallying against. That's a terrible sign for any movement or organization. So why keep the hashtag? Is the social momentum so important that respectable people should be forced to defend and associate with the absolute dregs of the Internet?
Boogie and Jim have hundreds of thousands of followers and millions upon millions of views. That's more than enough to establish the base of a new hashtag-powered movement. Instead of having everyone fight for another 10,000 posts about what #GG really means, why not just draw a line in the sand with a new hashtag dedicated towards ethics in game journalism and let the people that wanted to continue harassing people via GG keep it, while everyone who wants to focus on actual journalistic ethics can come on over? The only group that gets their agenda furthered by talking about the horrible people on the Internet is the horrible people.
I'm not talking about the trolls, or the MRAs, or the Adam Baldwin's of the world. They can keep GG, because it's clearly become an effective social tool for pushing forward... whatever it is that they're trying to push forward. I'm talking about people like Boogie and Jim, who have the exact same goals and motivation, but one of them is spending his time defending a hashtag from (completely justifiable) condemnation towards the worst elements of the Internet that have latched onto it, and the other is spending his time defending himself from attacks by those elements because the group's mixed motivations and resulting numbers have somehow granted it some sort of legitimacy deserving of notice.
You can't argue that #GamerGate isn't a poisoned movement at this point. Whatever the initial goal was (which, in all honesty, requires quite a bit of denial on anyone's part to believe it had positive motives coming from Baldwin), there's too much evidence of hate and harassment to say otherwise. In any other public industry on the planet, outside of maybe conservative politics, anyone who associated themselves with a movement that was so visibly malicious would be out of a job. Mega corporations and political campaigns have been torpedoed by far, far less.
This thread is devoted more to the discussion of what #GamerGate means than articulating solutions to the problems it purports to be rallying against. That's a terrible sign for any movement or organization. So why keep the hashtag? Is the social momentum so important that respectable people should be forced to defend and associate with the absolute dregs of the Internet?
Boogie and Jim have hundreds of thousands of followers and millions upon millions of views. That's more than enough to establish the base of a new hashtag-powered movement. Instead of having everyone fight for another 10,000 posts about what #GG really means, why not just draw a line in the sand with a new hashtag dedicated towards ethics in game journalism and let the people that wanted to continue harassing people via GG keep it, while everyone who wants to focus on actual journalistic ethics can come on over? The only group that gets their agenda furthered by talking about the horrible people on the Internet is the horrible people.
Neoriceisgood
Member
The easy answer? It was tried around 3 times, all 3 times #GGers jumped onto the new hashtag en mass to destroy it.
Alex_Mexico
Member
Thanks GAF. Now because of you I know who Vox Day is. 10 minutes ago I had never heard about the scumbag but now I know he's an ultra conservative tiny little person who has publicly acknowledged he's against every woman's right it's apparently destroying western civilized society and even is against women voting in elections! I mean what the fuck! How can anyone side to any cause when behind it you have an idiot like him? Why is he even someone people know about in the first place?
And yet people think feminism is pointless and unnecesary but when I see animals like Vox I realize that they're right and this is very sad.
N
Noray
Unconfirmed Member
Imagine how shocked GG'ers would be if they found out William Shakespeare wrote a feminist character, Emilia, way back in Othello (1603). Literary-critical analysis from a feminist perspective has been integrated by almost all art critics outside of gaming for many years, just look at that Siskel and Ebert gif from the 80s that's been floating around where they talk about horror films and their abysmal track record with women. Why, with games, is this suddenly a controversial thing? I really don't understand. Go read IGN if that's not what you're into. Or write your own review, or ignore the reviews. Who cares, if you enjoy the thing. The notion that a few indie developers and writers with an audience of thousands of people out of millions and millions of gamers are going to take your toys away is so ridiculous, I feel like these people can't even be reasoned with because they simply fail to see the world as it is.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
I dunno, but it seems to be a common complaints I see from GG folks: that reviews are biased, and most of their evidence boils down to 'they said something SJW'.
One that was pointed out to me was polygon's Tropico 5 review. The review mentions the jokes falling flat, leaving him feeling more like a bully then anything. The GG guy felt this was a horrible amount of bias, and that 'hurting the feelings' of the reviewer wasn't grounds to give it the score in question.
endless dave
Member
I mean, he was accepted as a leader. It's not like he's some evil despot who took the internet throne. His views and ways of approaching the subject matter fits in line with a lot of people in the movement
Off the top of my head:
Ada Initiative
GaymerX
DifferentGames
Games4Diversity
AbleGamersCharity
BlackGirlsCode
Critical Distance
Ontological Geek
IGDA(supposedly)
WomenInGames
DiGRA
QueerCon
GeekGirlsCon
I can pm you you people you can support and listen to, if you want? I dont want to name names in case I might Expose them to harassment by lurkers in this thread.
Opinionatedfish
Member
I would like to know more about these three times. This is new information to me.
Galactic Fork
A little fluff between the ears never did any harm...
Please, at that point in his career, Shakespeare was already purely in bed with internet SJWs, I mean he also put in a black lead... In the 1600s? He completely threw away realism for the sake of inclusion.
Neoriceisgood
Member
I know #gameethics was attempted shortly and is generally seen as the only example large enough to stand out, GGers seem to hate it though.
I know that I've seen at least one other, but I can't for the life of me remember the ones that weren't #gameethics. (#gameethics is easily the only one significant enough to really care/read about though.)
I believe the one last week was #iwantdiversegames or something like that.
Quote
Member
Does anyone have a link to Brianna Wu on MSNBC?
Edit: Found it - http://www.msnbc.com/the-reid-report/watch/sexism-and-the-battle-of-the-gamers-341581379929
Edit: Found it - http://www.msnbc.com/the-reid-report/watch/sexism-and-the-battle-of-the-gamers-341581379929
Neoriceisgood
Member
Ah yeah, that's one of the others I was thinking of! Thank you.
(in case I can't remember the 3rd, just pretend it was #neverkissagamer)
The problem is that any time someone tries to make a new positive hashtag GG descends on it like a Locust swarm and suffocates any discussion.
The only ways I can see for a new movement to survive is to either weather the storm (and be created in full knowledge that that will be required) or wait until GG dies down first.
Not sure if this is going too off-topic, but David Ellis (343, former 1UP) is defending Polygon's Bayonetta review on Twitter.
read from the bottom
Reads to me like he's defending opinions, not the review's conclusions.
But that's just like, my opinion, man.
N
Noray
Unconfirmed Member
Legit can't tell if this is brilliant satire because it's indistinguishable from the real thing because the real thing is equally idiotic... or the real thing.
Hmmm, I don't think this guy should do this actually, he seems a little fragile right now and I would be concerned that it'd intensify the level of abuse he's apparently getting. Nothing a reactionary movement hates more than an apostate.
Just take a break while it dies down would be my advice, if he took it.
Right. Defending the idea that Gies had every right to review and score the game the way he did.
Which is somehow controversial.
Opinionatedfish
Member
Those are all kind of long. How about #GamerYes or #EthicsNow or something like that. Maybe something shorter would be more effective? #EJN (Ethical Journalism Now) would be good... because it could be recycled whenever groups like MSNBC/FOX misrepresent minority groups or people in their articles.
Hmm...
Galactic Fork
A little fluff between the ears never did any harm...
Protip, Shakespeare probably didn't actually know any internet SJWs...
Kris Pistofferson
Banned
It's not corruption but I do think it exemplifies the misrepresentation of feminism that I see in so many people trying to act feminist. Everything about the character subverts entirely the very tropes that Anita Sarkeesian has been talking about over the past year.
While I haven't played Bayonetta 2, the original plot was 'single mom and her female friend save the world while all the men stand around helpless'. Focusing on the fact that she's a caricature of the prototypical sex icon just shows how much the author misses the point of feminism.
It's like complaining that Starship Troopers was 'too fascist'.
Neoriceisgood
Member
GameEthics was only one letter longer than Gamergate, so I doubt length has much to do with it not particularly taking off.
Honestly a big thing about #GG that I've noticed, is that for a lot of participants they didn't seem to have a twitter account before GG happened. A large chunk of #GGers seem to be on twitter exclusively to support GG. (not all, but quite a chunk)
A lot of feminist voices I follow on twitter et all actually like Bayonetta. People usually don't care if they have something positive to say about sexualization or nudity though, as it doesn't fit into the "EXTREME SJW" narrative.
If you read my subsequent post to Boogie you would see that I tell him that he needs to take care of himself before helping others. Oxygen mask on yourself before others, you know? So yeah definitely.
This got me real good.
- Status