Support NeoGAF

[Gentleman Jack]

Is that not a good method of approaching controversial topics?



You're not exactly an unbiased source. Even given my own relatively extensive research, I've yet to come down on a side. Too many sources provide conflicting information that conveniently vindicates their own view point. What I'm certain of, is that there were trolls definitely harassing women, journalists definitely not doing their jobs very well, and well-meaning individuals on both sides being betrayed by deceitful aggressors and harassed for their alignment.

At this point, I think it's simply easier for me to say that there is a culture of misogyny in gaming (though I've yet to determine if it's significantly greater than any other industry) and a lack of journalistic ethics (which, given recent news coverage, probably isn't so severe in the world at large), and that ideally both shouldn't exist. Sides are irrelevant in the matter.

You haven't done any research if you think GG was at all about ethics instead of a targeted hate campaign against dissident female voices in gaming.

 

[Arkage]

Sexism and misogyny don't need intent to exist.

Someone who doesn't know better is much different from someone who has malicious intent. There are those who think intent should help filter which instances of sexism are actively discussed to make the conversation more focused and thus strengthen the message of the movement (less grey areas), and then there are those who think intent should play no role due to the systemic aspect of the problem.

 

[Zakalwe]

Is that not a good method of approaching controversial topics?



You're not exactly an unbiased source. Even given my own relatively extensive research, I've yet to come down on a side. Too many sources provide conflicting information that conveniently vindicates their own view point. What I'm certain of, is that there were trolls definitely harassing women, journalists definitely not doing their jobs very well, and well-meaning individuals on both sides being betrayed by deceitful aggressors and harassed for their alignment.

At this point, I think it's simply easier for me to say that there is a culture of misogyny in gaming (though I've yet to determine if it's significantly greater than any other industry) and a lack of journalistic ethics (which, given recent news coverage, probably isn't so severe in the world at large), and that ideally both shouldn't exist. Sides are irrelevant in the matter.

If you goolge GG, there's extensive information about the harassment. There's also evidence of the 4chan chat logs of specific users discussing how to steer the situation to target and harass other women.

I'd love to read the sources you found for "the other side of the argument".

 

[EventHorizon]

...you dont know anything a bout gamergate, and then come in and say that no one is right and the truth should be somewhere in the middle.

Gamergate, a documented harassment campagin vs women in the gaming industry.

I say that what I know about GamerGate leads me to believe that both sides have good and bad points. As a result there was no much of a hook for me to do a deep dive into it like I normally would do. As I said, both sides are heros and villians.

Yes there absolutely was harassment against women, and there is it a portion of the gamer community who are absolute jerks. On the other hand the pushback against that was way too broad. It was at this point when it blew up that it came to my attention. So my first experience with Gamergate was getting lumped in with a bunch of other reprehensible people and noticing that that appeared to be a main tactic used by that side of the argument to squash debate. It was like they couldn't comprehend that more than two sides of the argument existed.

So there I was. I was not going to take the side of the misogynist gamers, but I'm also not going to take the side of the overreaction to them. I still feel that way. I am just curious enough to pop my head back in a thread about Gamergate to see what's the latest. I give my opinion as a mildly interested bystander, but I really don't want to associate with either side.

 

[Mael]

these things are designed by committee anyways, just like movies. it isn't some precious vision stemming from the mind of a single artist, it's more like a production line. even if the "head" of development has a vision, they still have to answer to someone above them, who has to answer to someone above them, and so on, and so on...

passing the buck is no excuse. "but it's art" is even less of an excuse. art is shaped by the real world whether you like it or not.

Exactly, it's not even anything new or controversial.
The people at nintendo kind of work like that a toy company to begin with.
they make high quality toys but it's still toys in the end.
The whole point isn't the "artist vision" or whatever the fuck else, the whole point is entertaining the customers.

You haven't done any research if you think GG was at all about ethics instead of a targeted hate campaign against dissident female voices in gaming.

Going on 8chan asking if they're a harassment group counts as research!

 

[Lime]

Nomadic Sparks, just FYI, you're kind of rambling and I am not sure you're helping here.

I'm sorry, I'm probably misunderstanding, because I agree with what you said here as well.

Didn't know about some of these examples, though. Like True Crime Hong Kong originally having a female character, or the Fable II cover. What a shame.

No need to apologize. Yeah, the point is just that women and racialized minority groups are speaking up about what they face when simply existing in video games culture, and in turn they are met with hostility and/or indifference/neutrality. It's important that people listen and that companies and actors with power and influence (like game companies, which gamers listen to a lot) do something about the sexism instead of being silent and neutral while vulnerable groups are harassed and excluded in video games culture.

By the way, here are the threads/stories about Fable 2 and True Crime / Sleeping Dogs:

Fable 2 story: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1218918

Activision & True Crime story: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/120558/InDepth_No_Female_Heroes_At_Activision.php

I wonder if that was also imposed on them when the game became Sleeping Dogs or if by that point they just changed so much that they decided to go with Wei Shen so they wouldn't have to spend too much time on changing it back. Do you know anything about that?

Yeah, I think UFG already had much of the game finished when Activision dropped it before Square Enix picked it up. But I am extremely happy that we got Wei Shen, because he's seriously one of the best written characters in a long time (at least for me).

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

People still pretending they don't know what gamergate is 2 and a half years later huh

Industry has a lot of problems with sexism in games, in offices, and in the consumer base but they let it rock because of profits. I think it's entirely fair they get called out for hypocrisy

 

[Gold_Loot]

the Grant Theft Auto has exclusively had female (no male) prostitutes/strippers/etc. and no playable female characters.

i can see why you would have trouble thinking of the name, it's only one of the most famous and best selling series of all time

Can you point me to a specific main scenario mission in a GTA game where the players needs to "mame and dump" women?

If an open world playground of a game gives you the freedom to act like an ass, then perhaps it's more of -said ass than the game itself.

 

[Mael]

I say that what I know about GamerGate leads me to believe that both sides have good and bad points. As a result there was no much of a hook for me to do a deep dive into it like I normally would do. As I said, both sides are heros and villians.

Yes there absolutely was harassment against women, and there is it a portion of the gamer community who are absolute jerks. On the other hand the pushback against that was way too broad. It was at this point when it blew up that it came to my attention. So my first experience with Gamergate was getting lumped in with a bunch of other reprehensible people and noticing that that appeared to be a main tactic used by that side of the argument to squash debate. It was like they couldn't comprehend that more than two sides of the argument existed.

So there I was. I was not going to take the side of the misogynist gamers, but I'm also not going to take the side of the overreaction to them. I still feel that way. I am just curious enough to pop my head back in a thread about Gamergate to see what's the latest. I give my opinion as a mildly interested bystander, but I really don't want to associate with either side.

And your research is?

You can still look at the thread about it here

 

[RoboticWater]

Oh, please do provide your extensive research that shows that both sides are equally as bad.

I can't; it's not like I documented it, and regardless, my point was that my research proved only that the sources contradicted each other, not which ones were right. And I certainly didn't say both sides were as bad. Trolling and harassing women is certainly the worse offense, but to imply that the other side is utterly innocent is simply disregarding facts. TB and other figures still get, in my opinion, unwarranted hostility because they agreed with the "ethics in games journalism" aspect of GamerGate.

The fact that some people are treating critical thinking with condescension is troublesome enough. Misogyny isn't a complex topic: we shouldn't do it, end of story. But GamerGate? That's got a lot of moving parts.

 

[Zakalwe]

I say that what I know about GamerGate leads me to believe that both sides have good and bad points. As a result there was no much of a hook for me to do a deep dive into it like I normally would do. As I said, both sides are heros and villians.

Yes there absolutely was harassment against women, and there is it a portion of the gamer community who are absolute jerks. On the other hand the pushback against that was way too broad. It was at this point when it blew up that it came to my attention. So my first experience with Gamergate was getting lumped in with a bunch of other reprehensible people and noticing that that appeared to be a main tactic used by that side of the argument to squash debate. It was like they couldn't comprehend that more than two sides of the argument existed.

So there I was. I was not going to take the side of the misogynist gamers, but I'm also not going to take the side of the overreaction to them. I still feel that way. I am just curious enough to pop my head back in a thread about Gamergate to see what's the latest. I give my opinion as a mildly interested bystander, but I really don't want to associate with either side.

Five minutes of research will show you there really weren't good points on both sides.

Even if the original intent had been about ethics, the movement very quickly became a harassment campaign and stayed that way until the end.

 

[SomedayTheFire]

Someone who doesn't know better is much different from someone who has malicious intent. There are those who think intent should help filter which instances of sexism are actively discussed to make the conversation more focused and thus strengthen the message of the movement (less grey areas), and then there are those who think intent should play no role due to the systemic nature of the problem.

Well yeah calling something sexist is not a blanket "this thing is abhorrent". There are degrees of sexism, but it can still be sexism without intent. Stuff like "you throw like a girl" or " be a man" are passively sexist. They were borne from the view of women being "weaker" than men, not everyone who says those things is a horrible person, but they're saying passively sexist things. A sexist act without intent is still inherently sexist, but not immediately as bad as malicious sexism.

 

[Clear]

Wiping your hands or pushing away the issue as something not characteristic of video games culture isn't doing anyone, especially the ones facing the discrimination and sexism, any good.

Neither does pursuing unproductive failing strategies that do nothing to curb the issue in question.

My view is simple; targeting gaming is ineffective without dealing with the larger issues of toxic elements within internet culture first. To me, its putting a sticking plaster on a cut-lip whilst a gaping head-wound is gushing blood.

I'm not hand-waving off that there is an issue, I just have severe misgivings about the process. I'm sorry, but in my view you tackle systemic problems at the root, not just trimming at the extremities that catch your eye.

 

[Lime]

People still pretending they don't know what gamergate is 2 and a half years later huh

Industry has a lot of problems with sexism in games, in offices, and in the consumer base but they let it rock because of profits. I think it's entirely fair they get called out for hypocrisy

Yep.

 

[Zakalwe]

but to imply that the other side is utterly innocent is simply disregarding facts.

Please, tell us of these facts.

 

[SomedayTheFire]

Neither does pursuing unproductive failing strategies that do nothing to curb the issue in question.

My view is simple; targeting gaming is ineffective without dealing with the larger issues of toxic elements within internet culture. To me, its putting a sticking plaster on a cut-lip whilst a gaping head-wound is gushing blood.

I'm not hand-waving off that there is an issue, I just have severe misgivings about the process. I'm sorry, but in my view you tackle systemic problems at the root, not just trimming at the extremities that catch your eye.

Why not both?

 

[Gentleman Jack]

I can't; it's not like I documented it, and regardless, my point was that my research proved only that the sources contradicted each other, not which ones were right. And I certainly didn't say both sides were as bad. Trolling and harassing women is certainly the worse offense, but to imply that the other side is utterly innocent is simply disregarding facts.

You're not identifying who the 'other side' is in this equation, nor the 'facts' that you assert surfaced in your extensive research on the topic.

 

[Jiguryo]

This isn't a war on misogyny, it's a war on immaturity. Even the truest points can be lost in bad delivery.

Well, it's a war on both - as there are a lot of adult misogynists. I wouldn't put it in an "either / or" approach here if I were you.

 

[GonzoCR]

People still pretending they don't know what gamergate is 2 and a half years later huh

Industry has a lot of problems with sexism in games, in offices, and in the consumer base but they let it rock because of profits. I think it's entirely fair they get called out for hypocrisy

I haven't had an account here for very long, but from what I've seen that rarely is the case. The people who are "just asking questions" and saying "both sides are the same" are very rarely in threads looking to actually have a rational discussion.

 

[Par Score]

You're not exactly an unbiased source. Even given my own relatively extensive research, I've yet to come down on a side. Too many sources provide conflicting information that conveniently vindicates their own view point. What I'm certain of, is that there were trolls definitely harassing women, journalists definitely not doing their jobs very well, and well-meaning individuals on both sides being betrayed by deceitful aggressors and harassed for their alignment.

At this point, I think it's simply easier for me to say that there is a culture of misogyny in gaming (though I've yet to determine if it's significantly greater than any other industry) and a lack of journalistic ethics (which, given recent news coverage, probably isn't so severe in the world at large), and that ideally both shouldn't exist. Sides are irrelevant in the matter.

I say that what I know about GamerGate leads me to believe that both sides have good and bad points. As a result there was no much of a hook for me to do a deep dive into it like I normally would do. As I said, both sides are heros and villians.

Yes there absolutely was harassment against women, and there is it a portion of the gamer community who are absolute jerks. On the other hand the pushback against that was way too broad. It was at this point when it blew up that it came to my attention. So my first experience with Gamergate was getting lumped in with a bunch of other reprehensible people and noticing that that appeared to be a main tactic used by that side of the argument to squash debate. It was like they couldn't comprehend that more than two sides of the argument existed.

So there I was. I was not going to take the side of the misogynist gamers, but I'm also not going to take the side of the overreaction to them. I still feel that way. I am just curious enough to pop my head back in a thread about Gamergate to see what's the latest. I give my opinion as a mildly interested bystander, but I really don't want to associate with either side.

How is this still happening? Two and a half years later, how is this still happening?

We really are living in a post truth world. Where a harassment campaign orchestrated by a jealous ex-boyfriend, which morphed into a more generalised and extensive attack on women and progressives in the games industry, can still somehow be written off as "both sides are bad".

What the actual fuck is going on?

 

[Kurdel]

Can you point me to a specific main scenario mission in a GTA game where the players needs to "mame and dump" women?

If an open world playground of a game gives you the freedom to act like an ass, then perhaps it's more of -said ass than the game itself.

If female prostitutes are just meaningless window dressing, why are they only women?

They are designed to a part of the power fantasy. A trivial, optional part, but still a decision by the developer.

How is the prostitution situation in Watchdogs 2? I feel like that may have a smarter and more nuanced depiction of sex workers.

 

[Lime]

Neither does pursuing unproductive failing strategies that do nothing to curb the issue in question.

My view is simple; targeting gaming is ineffective without dealing with the larger issues of toxic elements within internet culture. To me, its putting a sticking plaster on a cut-lip whilst a gaping head-wound is gushing blood.

I'm not hand-waving off that there is an issue, I just have severe misgivings about the process. I'm sorry, but in my view you tackle systemic problems at the root, not just trimming at the extremities that catch your eye.

Don't you agree that game companies have influence and status in video games culture? That people listen to Gabe Newell? That people listen to Blizzard? To Obsidian? To Spencer? To Yoshida? To Reggie? To EA? And so forth.

And if so, don't you agree that if they spoke up about the cultural space that they inhabit and that they curate, then that would have an influence on people and signal to the bigots that they are in the minority?

They already speak up in terms of marketing and PR, so clearly they are already influencing the cultural spaces. Yet they don't engage systematic issues within games culture and instead remain silent in the face of harassment and misogyny/racism/homophobia.

It's pretty simple - game companies have influence and status and power - why not use this to speak up against the bigotry existing in games culture?

 

[Mael]

I can't; it's not like I documented it, and regardless, my point was that my research proved only that the sources contradicted each other, not which ones were right. And I certainly didn't say both sides were as bad. Trolling and harassing women is certainly the worse offense, but to imply that the other side is utterly innocent is simply disregarding facts.

The fact that some people are treating critical thinking with condescension is troublesome enough. Misogyny isn't a complex topic: we shouldn't do it, end of story. But GamerGate? That's got a lot of moving parts.

Don't make it look like GG is anything complicated or worthwhile.
It's a thinly disguised harassment movement with very obvious origins and goals.
It started as a harrassment of a female dev and try to hide in a veneer of "ethics" and "notyourshield".
There is nothing complicated or troubling about GG, its origins or its goals.
Your position is NOT critical thinking, that you can't even provide what lead you to your position says a lot.

 

[Teletraan1]

Really? The PRIMARY point of Tomb Raider is to "maim and dump" Laura for sport? Similar question to the second game: Rockstar titled a "female maim and dump" simulator "Grand Theft Auto?" That seems a bit foolish.

It also seems foolish to harp on one sentence from a 15 minute presentation where she is recalling a conversation she had with a game industry professional. Why would you need to use a PRIMARY qualifier? She didn't. She made a general comment that could apply to any number of games given the context in which she used it. I wish she had left that anecdote out of her presentation but then this thread would probably have lasted less than 1 page. Which is a shame because more people need to be exposed to the garbage that passes as normal in this industry.

 

[Zakalwe]

Your position is NOT critical thinking, that you can't even provide what lead you to your position says a lot.

This seems accurate, unfortunately.

 

[SerTapTap]

There's some very valid points to be made regarding sexism in the gaming industry, so it's almost impressive how poorly she managed to make this point.

Aside from a bit of slowness in the initial rejection/recognition (I'll admit myself I didn't realize in the first week or so of the whole situation it was a 4chan harassment marathon), I'd say the game dev community handled GG about as well as it could be handled (there was really no "press this button and they go away" response to be made), it's pretty handily settled among major devs and despised by the lot of them.

Talking about games as if AAA games were all about killing women makes the whole thing sound very...not in touch. AAA games generally have a violence problem, but including too many women is not exactly a fault they have. The comment makes it sound like COD is Yandere Sim or something (now that's a game that's truly deplorable as are it's fans and creators).

Here's a quick list of things that actually happen in frequency that could have been used instead: Damsels in distress, no playable women, playable women as sidekick/secondary only, lack of female developers, underrepresentation in speaking roles at major events, that's just off the top of my head and I'm not headed into a TED talk.

I can't really say it's a good look either way, though I'll generally agree, yeah, the industry sucks at feminism/inclusivity other than, to an extent, the indie side. People I follow on twitter tend to be very, very supportive of women but they're not the big name games.

Edit: TBH, the most concerning thing in general here is there are apparently people still thinking GG is a thing you can be "neutral" about, feel like I fell back into 2015

 

[Freeman]

This is just a continuation of the old smear campaigns that said gamer were satanists, that ts made people violent, etc. A bunch of prudes that find visibility/money by looking for something to complain about.

Years of this with no real progress, no end go, there is no point where those complaining would be satisfied. Pure politics.

 

[Lime]

This is just a continuation of the old smear campaigns that said gamer were satanists, that ts made people violent, etc. A bunch of prudes that find visibility/money by looking for something to complain about.

Years of this with no real progress, no end go, there is no point where those complaining would be satisfied. Pure politics.

Serious question: When you write this post, do you think about the fact that your response is to a woman coming out and speaking about the sexism and harassment she experienced? Another human being is coming out and telling you about the stuff she has experienced (and that many others can subscribe to), and your reaction is that she and others are a bunch of prudes?

 

[Freeman]

Serious question: When you write this post, do you think about the fact that your response is to a woman coming out and speaking about the sexism and harassment she experienced? Another human being is coming out and telling you about the stuff she has experienced (and that many others can subscribe to), and your reaction is that she and others are a bunch of prudes?

Yep. If you can't handle fictional entertainment and free expression the problem is with you. I don't go around protesting Twilight and Fifty Shades of Grey because I don't like it or think the message sucks. She doesn't like it, tons of people like it, life goes on.

 

[SomedayTheFire]

There's some very valid points to be made regarding sexism in the gaming industry, so it's almost impressive how poorly she managed to make this point.

Aside from a bit of slowness in the initial rejection/recognition (I'll admit myself I didn't realize in the first week or so of the whole situation it was a 4chan harassment marathon), I'd say the game dev community handled GG about as well as it could be handled (there was really no "press this button and they go away" response to be made), it's pretty handily settled among major devs and despised by the lot of them.

Talking about games as if AAA games were all about killing women makes the whole thing sound very...not in touch. AAA games generally have a violence problem, but including too many women is not exactly a fault they have. The comment makes it sound like COD is Yandere Sim or something (now that's a game that's truly deplorable as are it's fans and creators).

Here's a quick list of things that actually happen in frequency that could have been used instead: Damsels in distress, no playable women, playable women as sidekick/secondary only, lack of female developers, underrepresentation in speaking roles at major events, that's just off the top of my head and I'm not headed into a TED talk.

I can't really say it's a good look either way, though I'll generally agree, yeah, the industry sucks at feminism/inclusivity other than, to an extent, the indie side. People I follow on twitter tend to be very, very supportive of women but they're not the big name games.

She made her point perfectly fine as an outsider. This is what people think when they think of gaming, that's what people here need to realise. The first reaction shouldn't be defend gaming at all costs it should be to ask yourself "why does she think this? And how can we improve?"

Like if you sat someone who had no idea about gaming down and showed them the shit you can do to women in GTA, like you can actually sexually harass them, they would be shocked and that's the "pinnacle" of gaming recently.

Her argument is about gaming as an outsider and she hits the nail on the head. Why is it like this? Why do people that are outside of gaming feel like this? How can we as consumers, as developers, as publishers even, make this a better place for people to come and enjoy the hobby?

 

[Zakalwe]

This is just a continuation of the old smear campaigns that said gamer were satanists, that ts made people violent, etc. A bunch of prudes that find visibility/money by looking for something to complain about.

Years of this with no real progress, no end go, there is no point where those complaining would be satisfied. Pure politics.

So mysogyny doesn't exist in the gaming world because games don't make people violent and we're not all satanists?

 

[meltingparappa]

It also seems foolish to harp on one sentence from a 15 minute presentation where she is recalling a conversation she had with a game industry professional. Why would you need to use a PRIMARY qualifier? She didn't. She made a general comment that could apply to any number of games given the context in which she used it. I wish she had left that anecdote out of her presentation but then this thread would probably have lasted less than 1 page. Which is a shame because more people need to be exposed to the garbage that passes as normal in this industry.

I agree that this thread would have been avoided if she didn't include that.

There are far, FAR fewer people that would argue that online harassment isn't an epidemic without any attempt to socially police from people who can make a difference.

The issue is throwing games under that same bus, with the implied severity of her prior anecdotes, is a huge can of worms born from a statement where few can find a clear example of a game that flagrantly awards the maiming and dumping of women.

I would hope most people acknowledge that there is a problem of misogyny in the gaming industry, that isn't necessarily unique to the gaming industry, but the circular arguments in these threads come from strong feelings about what's blamed as evidence, and the implication of being complicit because you enjoy them.

 

[Mael]

I agree that this thread would have been avoided if she didn't include that.

There are far, FAR fewer people that would argue that online harassment isn't an epidemic without any attempt to socially police from people who can make a difference.

The issue is throwing games under that same bus, with the implied severity of her prior anecdotes, is a huge can of worms born from a statement where few can find a clear example of a game that flagrantly awards the maiming and dumping of women.

I would hope most people acknowledge that there is a problem of misogyny in the gaming industry, but the circular arguments in these threads come from strong feelings about the evidence from finer details.

Why is it an issue that games (or more accurately the industry that produce them) are thrown under the bus?
What is there to gain from saying that the community is garbo but the products that fostered them are not?

 

[ironmang]

This is a shallow argument.

Tired of blaming slaveowners over racism. They are just trying to maximize profit!

Exaggeration of course but illustrates how horrible outcomes can't be justified by profit to subsets of society.

It is an absurd exaggeration that involves comparing real victims to an absence of fictional women. Why even post it?

Maybe GR2 is a bad example because of the scope & budget?
TLOU Part 2 seems like a better example of better representation.
GR2 isn't exactly the kind of AAA stuffs the industry uses as standard bearer.
Games with proper representation of women can and do sell.

Game is on shelves and it's reviewing well. People know it's out. How much visibility do you need?

TLOU 2 seems like a weird choice. Forgive me if I'm wrong but wasn't the first almost entirely played through Joel? It doesn't matter who the lead is it's going to sell very well just from the name.

 

[ViolentP]

Well, it's a war on both - as there are a lot of adult misogynists. I wouldn't put it in an "either / or" approach here if I were you.

No doubt there are. I simply see this as a trickle down effect. While no one should turn a cheek to misogyny in gaming, the war should not be fought on those grounds. Publishers sell what sells and a lot of people are hardwired to be attracted to sexuality. Once we start breaking those ties, the sales will dwindle and you will begin seeing more diversity of women in gaming.

And dickheads that spew ignorance on social media? Many too are in it for financially lucrative reasons. Start cutting those lines and you will see this industry evolve.

TV objectifies women and there are a lot of women that perpetuate that behavior due to the glamorous veneer in which it's presented. Magazines and social media personalities do this as well because its what sells.

This is purely what I have observed in my personal experiences and I am not saying anyone needs to agree with it, but I've seen it.

Where I believe we are going to start seeing real change is with the evolution of how we raise our children to treat everyone equally. Soon they will be running the show.

 

[Arthimura]

That's cool.

But what are your thoughts on the words Ashley Judd said?

My thoughts are what i said :^)

Maybe GR2 is a bad example because of the scope & budget?
TLOU Part 2 seems like a better example of better representation.
GR2 isn't exactly the kind of AAA stuffs the industry uses as standard bearer.
Games with proper representation of women can and do sell.



Pfahaahahahahaah
We all know that's BS.
The publishers get the last say and if they say they don't want to do something, the dev ain't doing shit.
There's no such thing as artistic freedom in a vaccum.

Of course there's some limit to artistic freedom, but a lot of publishers let the developers create the games they want if there's a market, see games like NieR/Drakengard 3, Suda51 games, etc.

 

[Lime]

the implication of being complicit because you enjoy them.

No one ever said that and that's you projecting something onto what Judd said. It's actually very typical for people to think that criticism of videogames means a criticism of their person - this is an incorrect self-insertion, as you are not the video game and that it's possible to enjoy video games with problematic elements without being "a horrible person" or complicit in them.

The only thing people can be complicit in in regards to sexism is to shut down and silence the women coming out and talking about their experiences.

The issue is throwing games under that same bus, with the implied severity of her prior anecdotes, is a huge can of worms born from a statement where few can find a clear example of a game that flagrantly awards the maiming and dumping of women.

there's plenty of examples in this video

 

[Icedburden]

It really feels like, through that quote, she sees games as mysoginistic because wants to. It helps make her point. She doesn't play them, which is obvious, so she makes a blanket quote inferring that all games are like GTA.
Highly doubt she knows that games like Gravity Rush, Bound, Gone Home and Life Is Strange even exist.

 

[ShironRedshift]

Really says a lot that some people's first response is to rush and defend gaming or find some way to completely discredit her instead of actually trying to understand why she feels the way she does and asking how we can do better to make gaming better, more welcoming, and enjoyable to everyone. Not surprising, but says a lot.

Five minutes of research will show you there really weren't good points on both sides.

Even if the original intent had been about ethics, the movement very quickly became a harassment campaign and stayed that way until the end.

EventHorizon has shown up in threads like these for quite some time. He knows exactly what he's doing. The both sides schtick is just a GG talking point to try and derail threads. Ignore it.

 

[Mael]

Game is on shelves and it's reviewing well. People know it's out. How much visibility do you need?

TLOU 2 seems like a weird choice. Forgive me if I'm wrong but wasn't the first almost entirely played through Joel? It doesn't matter who the lead is it's going to sell very well just from the name.

It's also a poor example to use if it performs badly.
Something like Mirror's Edge would be a better example.
I'm saying that using Gravity Rush success or lack of success isn't a good indication of gamers accepting female protagonist in action games because of how low key the game is for Sony.
Unlike TLOU which is probably a poor example.
Should have used Horizon by Guerrilla.

 

[SomedayTheFire]

It really feels like, through that quote, she sees games as mysoginistic because wants to. It helps make her point. She doesn't play them, which is obvious, so she makes a blanket quote inferring that all games are like GTA.
Highly doubt she knows that games like Gravity Rush, Bound, Gone Home and Life Is Strange even exist.

A small sample of games "done right" don't act as a shield for anything else.

 

[Arkage]

Well yeah calling something sexist is not a blanket "this thing is abhorrent". There are degrees of sexism, but it can still be sexism without intent. Stuff like "you throw like a girl" or " be a man" are passively sexist. They were borne from the view of women being "weaker" than men, not everyone who says those things is a horrible person, but they're saying passively sexist things. A sexist act without intent is still inherently sexist, but not immediately as bad as malicious sexism.

But, for example, I think it's a problem when things like the ME female-reporter face punch is perceived as sexist, and is essentially filed into the broad category of "videogame sexism." Finding solid examples that many others could agree upon is what convinces and grows a movement - things like there only being female prostitutes and male cops in videogames. I find it disheartening when the *most* controversial (often intention-less) instances of sexism become the flashpoint for conversation.

 

[Forsaken82]

IMO the film industry is just as bad as the games industry in the way it uses sex appeal to sell their product. I mean... House of Wax used a movie poster that tried to bank off of Paris Hilton's sex tape that was making the rounds at the time.

Ashley Judd herself has starred in films that even used HER sex appeal back when she was somewhat attractive to look at to sell film.

 

[Mael]

Of course there's some limit to artistic freedom, but a lot of publishers let the developers create the games they want if there's a market, see games like NieR/Drakengard 3, Suda51 games, etc.

We get to discuss why a dev choosing to use the platform of their choice or even the control of their choice is a good/bad idea.
We're going to discuss whether or not their artistic choice is good/bad too.
Fuck that whole "artistic freedom" shit that no one even gives a crap if the dev make the mistake of choosing motion control for their grand vision.

 

[Madame M]

Ashley Judd is a coward for not running against McConnell in the senate

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

IMO the film industry is just as bad as the games industry in the way it uses sex appeal to sell their product.

Ashley Judd herself has starred in films that even used HER sex appeal back when she was somewhat attractive to look at to sell film.

Lol look at this lazy shit

 

[FyreWulff]

[x] both sides
[x] she isn't an angel
[x] comments on her appearance
[x] it's actually about ethics in games journalisms
[x] personal anecdote from male viewpoint on topic of women being harassed that supposedly proves it's not bad
[x] "but this one or two games exist with women" aka the Beyond Good and Evil Rule

 

[Makai]

This is making me realize none of the games I've played in the last several months are sexist at all - unless I'm forgetting one.

 

[LionPride]

IMO the film industry is just as bad as the games industry in the way it uses sex appeal to sell their product. I mean... House of Wax used a movie poster that tried to bank off of Paris Hilton's sex tape that was making the rounds at the time.

Ashley Judd herself has starred in films that even used HER sex appeal back when she was somewhat attractive to look at to sell film.

The hell this got to do with the topic at hand tho?

 

[Madame M]

Clearly Ashley Judd should have turned down roles if she had a feeling she only got the role because of her looks...

i.e. she should have never accepted any role, ever.