So in the end, Anita's video series managed to make her look bad, make developers look bad, make publishers look bad, make the media look bad, and make gamers look bad.
And after all that, nothing will change.
Worth it, Anita?....
How embarrassing.
So in the end, Anita's video series managed to make her look bad, make developers look bad, make publishers look bad, make the media look bad, and make gamers look bad.
And after all that, nothing will change.
Worth it, Anita?....
So in the end, Anita's video series managed to make her look bad, make developers look bad, make publishers look bad, make the media look bad, and make gamers look bad.
And after all that, nothing will change.
Worth it, Anita?....
So in the end, Anita's video series managed to make her look bad, make developers look bad, make publishers look bad, make the media look bad, and make gamers look bad.
And after all that, nothing will change.
Worth it, Anita?....
So in the end, Anita's video series managed to make her look bad, make developers look bad, make publishers look bad, make the media look bad, and make gamers look bad.
And after all that, nothing will change.
Worth it, Anita?....
We already have a catch all #gamergate thread, but this is new news on the issue, and thus deserving of a new thread solely about recent events. Importantly were getting commentary, or a lack thereof, from games companies. There is a thread in the OT on the Utah State death threats focused on the gun control angle, but I think there is a relevant discussion to be had here from the games angle.
![]()
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/16/t...omen-video-game-threats-anita-sarkeesian.html
Personally I think its shocking that EA, Activision and TakeTwo declined to make any comment against these death threats. Letting the ESA handle it is not enough.
Now that this issue has reached the front page of one of the most widely read newspapers in America, do games companies need to step forward and address the issue of violence against women who participate in gaming culture?
IGN, Gamespot, Polygon, etc. are more damnable in their lack of action taken against this.
Apathy doesn't cause bad shit but it allows bad shit to happen
Yep, wouldn't want a company saying that death threats are a bad thing.
Let's also forget that the large publishers were direct actors in almost every confirmed case of corruption in the games media.
I think it probably goes without saying any public body is going to condemn death threats and the like?
Any chiming in would just look like trying to capitalise on bad news.
Individual companies shouldn't make individual comments: that's exactly the work of industry organizations. And the Entertainment Software Association did exactly that as quoted in the article.
False equivalences are nice and comfy, aren't they?I do not agree with either side in this whole thing but the best action actual companies can take at this point is to just shut up to protect their own asses and stay out of it, nothing good will come their way by getting involved in the toxic mess that is gamergate and that goes towards both sides of it.
What 'action' should they take?
'Dear random people please stop emailing and/or tweeting threats'?
Boom there it is.
Now that this issue has reached the front page of one of the most widely read newspapers in America, do games companies need to step forward and address the issue of violence against women who participate in gaming culture?
Pretty much. But instead of trying to go after these guys half the gamergate crowd tries to prove that Anita faked the threats which makes them look even worse.I really don't get the logic in threats. If you hate Anita's opinion, this is the most counter-productive way of dealing with it.
Only if they do the same regarding the violence against men who participate in gaming culture. Equality and stuff.
"When you decline to create or to curate a culture in your spaces, youre responsible for what spawns in the vacuum."
To the handful of individuals taking actions which are already socially and legally indefensible, do you believe a statement from a company only loosely connected to the situation would prevent it from happening?
They could recognized the importance or relevance of what Anita is attempting to address and enter the conversation as major video game websites are drivers in the video game community.What 'action' should they take?
'Dear random people please stop emailing and/or tweeting threats'?
To the handful of individuals taking actions which are already socially and legally indefensible, do you believe a statement from a company only loosely connected to the situation would prevent it from happening?
Game companies aren't responsible for people emailing and tweeting anything. It's not 'in their space' at all.
False equivalences are nice and comfy, aren't they?
The problem is that for the people in the GG bubble, this is socially acceptable.
They think developers support them in their fight against the evil SJWs.
I do not agree with either side in this whole thing but the best action actual companies can take at this point is to just shut up to protect their own asses and stay out of it, nothing good will come their way by getting involved in the toxic mess that is gamergate and that goes towards both sides of it.
Pretty much. But instead of trying to go after these guys half the gamergate crowd tries to prove that Anita faked the threats which makes them look even worse.
Yeah I don't understand why any game publisher or even developer would need to comment on the matter.
Its a sticky situation and it's not like either could offer much.
They could recognized the importance or relevance of what Anita is attempting to address and enter the conversation as major video game websites are drivers in the video game community.
They could condemn immature and potentially dangerous Internet behavior much like sites moderate comments.
There are plenty of 'actions' websites, developers, and publishers could do to engage with the social and political aspects of this multibillion dollar industrym
You don't think "video game culture" is the space of video game companies and that they don't have any influence on it?
So in the end, Anita's video series managed to make her look bad, make developers look bad, make publishers look bad, make the media look bad, and make gamers look bad.
And after all that, nothing will change.
Worth it, Anita?....
Large-scale and collective denouncement across the board send strong signals by especially powerholders in this culture not only to the extremists, but most importantly to the moderates and the ones not in the know that this is a situation that is simply deplorable and should be condemned on all fronts.
Large-scale and collective denouncement across the board send strong signals by especially powerholders in this culture not only to the extremists, but most importantly to the moderates and the ones not in the know that this is a situation that is simply deplorable and should be condemned on all fronts.
Ugh more of this trite shit.
I think applying this idea to the current situation is preposterous. You suggested a stern denouncement from publishers barely related to the situation would have had the power to prevent the threats. These are individual behaviors which amount to terrorism, and they're deliberately anti-social.
Perhaps "going after them" was the wrong expression. My point is just that putting such a focus on trying to prove that the threats are fake made it look even worse.What's your plan that would actually work to go after them? How would you track down people who stay anonymous and may or may not be involved in the main movement?
If someone who lives in France bounces their IP to Switzerland then South Africa, then doxes/threatens someone from that location, how are individuals going to do anything to stop them?
Don't feed the trolls is my motto. Game companies would only speak out if it was one of their own customers or employees causing controversy I suppose.
The Entertainment Software Association issued a statement. All of the major publishers are a member of the ESA. They're representing those companies. It's as good as a statement from those companies, they don't need to make individual statements because they represent all of them.Part of their customer base is being harassed and getting death threats. I think games companies should acknowledge that this is happening and condemn it. I think they risk sending a signal to their customers that they don't care that this is happening.
I think applying this idea to the current situation is preposterous. You suggested a stern denouncement from publishers barely related to the situation would have had the power to prevent the threats. These are individual behaviors which amount to terrorism, and they're deliberately anti-social.
I do not condone harassing people at all but id be lying if i said i haven't seen people from both camps stepping over the line during the past 2 months, its silly and needs to stop entirely there, sending threats, doxxing people and harassing is wrong no matter who does it.Really? You dont agree with the side that wants folk to stop harassing voices that they consider dissenting and want to create a chilling effect on the industry that they pretend to love? Dont give me that "both sides are equally bad" BS from The Witcher, there is a side that is asking the industry to give its best (with industry people thanking them), and other that has Adam "Obama created Ebola" Baldwin.
There is no "either side"!I do not agree with either side in this whole thing but the best action actual companies can take at this point is to just shut up to protect their own asses and stay out of it, nothing good will come their way by getting involved in the toxic mess that is gamergate and that goes towards both sides of it.
[image]