Support NeoGAF

[Kinyou]

Leigh Alexander is pro-Bayonetta.

And Arthur Gies isn't. That must be some awkward thanksgiving

 

[Tiktaalik]

Companies that are quiet on this issue are essentially saying:

"Status quo is fine"
"This doesn't affect us"
"We don't care"

None of these are an acceptable response to what has been going on over the last several months.

 

[Reishiki]

Thanks for this! I am not familiar with the UK policies, could you elaborate on what the Communications Act 2003 have done? Making it legal for people to impersonate other people and appropriate their identities?

The pertinent provision is this one:

Sending a malicious communication using social media was made a criminal offence.

Wiki expands on this

Section 127 of the act makes it an offence to send a message that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character over a public electronic communications network.[8] The section replaced section 43 of the Telecommunications Act 1984 and is drafted as widely as its predecessor.[9] The section has controversially been widely used to prosecute users of social media in cases such as the Twitter Joke Trial and Facebook comments concerning the murder of April Jones.[10]

On 19 December 2012, to strike a balance between freedom of speech and criminality, the Director of Public Prosecutions issued interim guidelines, clarifying when social messaging is eligible for criminal prosecution under UK law. Only communications that are credible threats of violence, harassment, or stalking (such as aggressive Internet trolling) which specifically targets an individual or individuals, or breaches a court order designed to protect someone (such as those protecting the identity of a victim of a sexual offence) will be prosecuted. Communications that express an "unpopular or unfashionable opinion about serious or trivial matters, or banter or humor, even if distasteful to some and painful to those subjected to it" will not. Communications that are merely "grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or false" will be prosecuted only when it can be shown to be necessary and proportionate. People who pass on malicious messages, such as by retweeting, can also be prosecuted when the original message is subject to prosecution. Individuals who post messages as part of a separate crime, such as a plan to import drugs, would face prosecution for that offence, as is currently the case.[11][12][13]

Revisions to the interim guidelines were issued on 20 June 2013 following a public consultation.[14] The revisions specified that prosecutors should consider:

whether messages were aggravated by references to race, religion or other minorities, and whether they breached existing rules to counter harassment or stalking; and
the age and maturity of any wrongdoer should be taken into account and given great weight.

The revisions also clarified that criminal prosecutions were "unlikely":

when the author of the message had "expressed genuine remorse";
when "swift and effective action ... to remove the communication" was taken; or
when messages were not intended for a wide audience.

 

[Kinyou]

Companies that are quiet on this issue are essentially saying:

"Status quo is fine"
"This doesn't affect us"
"We don't care"

None of these are an acceptable response to what has been going on over the last several months.

But they're not quiet. They ESA spoke in all of their names.

 

[Orayn]

he must have been a time traveler

I'm not even kidding, she likes Bayonetta and finds her empowering.

These things are more complicated than many assume.

 

[Lord_Balkan]

Really? If the media you consume has sexist views don't see how you wouldn't be influenced by it. A person raised on racist media would probably turn racist.

Then why is half of Neogaf not violent mass murderers? Growing up on ultra violent video games such as Mortal Kombat and Doom.

EDIT: I am not trying to be difficult, I just can't find conclusive evidence on the causation of these issues related to video games.

 

[jay]

I started making this superawesome finely produced political cartoon, but, then I got bored. Sorry.

Point being, when this truck came driving up your street with its appealing looking banner slapped on the side and they asked if you wanted to get in, you should have looked a bit closer at the folk up in front behind the tinted windows. Because they're driving this thing, not you. You're just weight. Momentum.

And those unfortunate explosions that keep happening around you? A little hint: the ones driving the truck are causing those. Ignore that fact if you like and continue along for the ride, but at that point you don't get to say "Hey, it's not us back here doing that." You can get off this particular ride.

If you choose to stay on the truck, you're complicit in the actions of the truck.

Between the cartoon and your explanation, I still cannot understand what you are saying.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

Companies that are quiet on this issue are essentially saying:

"Status quo is fine"
"This doesn't affect us"
"We don't care"

None of these are an acceptable response to what has been going on over the last several months.

Then I guess it should be bigger-Men around the world should all stand up against the harassment women face. Why just limit it to video game companies? Whoever doesn't speak out in the world is, 'Supporting the Status Quo', 'And not caring.'

Spoiler

/hyperbole

 

[Tiktaalik]

But they're not quiet. They ESA spoke in all of their names.

I can see that maybe they think that's good enough but I don't think it is. No one knows what the ESA is. People recognize the company names.

 

[Lime]

This is the simple sort of action that I think would go a long way. More dev teams and publishers should be doing this.

And much more frequently, imo.

The fact that Nirolak had to dig up a two-year old Tweet is indicative of the silence by game developers.

 

[mugurumakensei]

Actually he received plenty of death threats and was mocked mercilessly within the gaming community. And this was mostly before Twitter, which I might add has exacerbated debates online.

he was also threatened with rape.
gaming attracts the most anti-social, terrible people. anoymous internet exacerbates it. then, you have puas and right-wing conservatives to top of the crazy. so, posting anything anti-gaming especially those which the 18-24 male demo likes is going to attract negative attention. most of the threats are going to be empty but theres always the chance that you are going to the one person evil enough to go through with it.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

This is about moving the debate from point A to point X.

I thought you said GG wasn't about fucking with women.

It's more than clear now that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I'm inclined to ask how old you are.

 

[Rubius]

Okay. You are seriously arguing that there is no proof of "anti-SJW" or anti-feminist sentiment existing on 4chan or in GamerGate. Everyone's just looking for attention or they're secretly planted by the opposition.

I'm sure all those lovely folks at /pol/ are just a big silly hivemind version of Colbert, elaborately mocking racism through hilarious irony.

Are you really taking /pol/ seriously? All they do to try to make the most racist comment possible. Is there some anti SJW people on 4chan ? Sure. Is it the most visible thing? Probably. I've been a user of 4chan for 7 years now. Just because you see threads about that, does not mean that you accept them. I see threads against everything every day. I do go in them if they start with a lie or something like that but other than that, I wont go around and try to defend stuff all day long. I would die on my keyboard.

 

[Lime]

But they're not quiet. They ESA spoke in all of their names.

.

ESA is an industry organization that unfortunately doesn't have much influence on consumers. It is commendable that they strive to condemn Gamergate and all the bigots involved, but it would be even better if the big power holders like EA, Activision, TakeTwo, notable developers and the bigger media outlets like IGN, Gamespot, etc..

ESA is not enough. I wish it was, but it isn't.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

I can see that maybe they think that's good enough but I don't think it is. No one knows what the ESA is. People recognize the company names.

Don't you think it's a bit hyperbolic that if a game company doesn't speak up, then obviously they're supporting the status quo/not caring? That's a bit of a jump in logic.

 

[Kinyou]

I can see that maybe they think that's good enough but I don't think it is. No one knows what the ESA is. People recognize the company names.

Which others could interpret of companies trying to get spotlight on them.
"We at UBISOFT care"
"We at ACTIVISION also care!"
To make a unified response through the ESA makes more sense to me.

.

You could blame the NYT for not detailing who exactly is part of the ESA. From a company perspective it makes more sense to me to send out this unified response

 

[Felix Lighter]

When it comes to social issues, post ea_spouse situation EA has been pretty good with social issues from my point of view.

 

[KidBeta]

/v/ hate everything and love everything. /v/ is not an entity. You can have threads about how great a game is and the next will be about how shitty this game is and it will have as many posts.



Happened a lot of times, but here the most recent death threats from feminists extremists.

I dont think there is a single group out there with members that never made threats.

Pretty much what I think about this, I don't see why people are getting so riled over this one topic and ignore stuff like what you posted.

 

[L Thammy]

Are you really taking /pol/ seriously? All they do to try to make the most racist comment possible. Is there some anti SJW people on 4chan ? Sure. Is it the most visible thing? Probably. I've been a user of 4chan for 7 years now. Just because you see threads about that, does not mean that you accept them. I see threads against everything every day. I do go in them if they start with a lie or something like that but other than that, I wont go around and try to defend stuff all day long. I would die on my keyboard.

If you'd oblige us for a moment. If blatant racism is obviously sarcasm, what would you have to see to be convinced that there was actually "anti SJW people" on 4chan? Let's go to imagination land.

 

[Lime]

Which others could interpret of companies trying to get spotlight on them.
"We at UBISOFT care"
"We at ACTIVISION also care!"
To make a unified response through the ESA makes more sense to me.

Why not both a collective and individual? Why should one exclude the other? And what does their motivations for being the first have to do with the signal they are sending? The more, the merrier, I don't care about their motivations, all I care about is that they do not remain silent and implicitly condone the harmful and hurtful status quo.

You could blame the NYT for not detailing who exactly is part of the ESA. From a company perspective it makes more sense to me to send out this unified response

You're really stretching it here.

 

[Rubius]

I thought you said GG wasn't about fucking with women.

And it's not. GG itself is not about fucking with women. How did you get that from my comment. GG is moved in different direction where people TRY to make it into a Gender issue, or even a racial issue or a sexual orientation issue in some case.

If I say "I want to know why this waitress is not telling me where the potatoes come from " and you answer "Stop harassing this women" this is moving the debate. I dont care that she's a women, I want to know where the potatoes come from. Are they frozen? I dont like those too much. If I attack a guy from Kotaku, I dont care that he's from Kotaku, he's a guy that said or did X. Just because I attack somebody that is a member from a group, do not mean that I attack the group.

 

[Shengar]

Really? If the media you consume has sexist views don't see how you wouldn't be influenced by it. A person raised on racist media would probably turn racist.

That only happened if the racist thing was done intentionally with malicious intent.

While they didn't comment here, EA has been pretty clear they support Anita: https://twitter.com/Battlefield/status/251735220292820993

Is there anyway for companies to express that they support the cause but not Anita?
Personally, as much as I support the cause, I just can't support Anita's view on this matter wholly.

 

[Buzzman]

And it's not. GG itself is not about fucking with women. How did you get that from my comment. GG is moved in different direction where people TRY to make it into a Gender issue, or even a racial issue or a sexual orientation issue in some case.

IT LITERALLY STARTED AS A MOVEMENT AGAINST ZOE QUINN. It was never about goddamn ethics.

 

[Lime]

When it comes to social issues, post ea_spouse situation EA has been pretty good with social issues from my point of view.

I agree that they've improved, but there's still room for improvement. Read this: http://www.blog.radiator.debacle.us/2013/03/on-eas-full-spectrum-event-aaa-devs.html

And to me, that's where the disconnect is: EA the developer can, and will, promote diversity in games. (Great!) It's just that EA the publisher wants to solely own that diversity and manage how that diversity gets distributed.

[...]

In "A Room of One's Own," Virginia Woolf argued that relative poverty and lack of freedom was what kept women from writing. So strengthening diversity is fundamentally about decentralizing this access to power. Diversity is NOT just "the AAA developer's burden", to labor in isolation for 1-3 years making an action RPG game with a throwaway token LGBT character -- it's also about fundamentally changing how the AAA industry operates with respect to its customers and fellow developers, and INCLUDING as many voices as possible.

That's not to say that they are doing anything wrong - they are doing something, which is really great. They could just do better and the issue of diversity is more complicated.

 

[GuessMyUserName]

This is the simple sort of action that I think would go a long way. More dev teams and publishers should be doing this.

What? Everybody has to be 100% behind Anita? How is this in any way at all right?

I mean I don't care if any company decides to make that statement, whatever it's all on them. But the situation will never ever be that you're either with Anita or you're damaging the industry.


You don't have to agree with Anita in order to be against death threats of any kind.

 

[Noaloha]

Between the cartoon and your explanation, I still cannot understand what you are saying.

Excellent! I consider that a positive for any self-respecting political cartoon.

Also, I posted the stupid thing in the wrong thread. Sorry. 3:30am.

 

[Rubius]

If you'd oblige us for a moment. If blatant racism is obviously sarcasm, what would you have to see to be convinced that there was actually "anti SJW people" on 4chan? Let's go to imagination land.

You have racism on 4chan and you have fake racism. Poe's law make it nearly impossible to know for sure, but when a post insult more than 5 races and 3-4 groups, I assume it's a joke post. And that's what Pol is.

Also, there is the whole "If you act like an idiot, dont be surprised if idiots feel welcomed." theory. But I do not think that 4chan itself is a racist, sexist or ...ist entity. It's composed of people, just like here. The rules are softer and everybody is anonymous. So this allow people to push the "edgyness" of what they say.

 

[Watch Da Birdie]

Back to Jack Thompson, funny thing is, looking through some of his past actions it seems like he has the same opinion on "SJW" as the majority of GamerGate.

Also, there is the whole "If you act like an idiot, dont be surprised if idiots feel welcomed." theory. But I do not think that 4chan itself is a racist, sexist or ...ist entity. It's composed of people, just like here. The rules are softer and everybody is anonymous. So this allow people to push the "edgyness" of what they say.

There has to be a limit, though. I mean what a normal person will go to when it comes to being edgy.

I've posted on 4chan before, but I never once thought "gee, it'd be funny if I pretend to threaten a person!". There's a huge difference between going to 4chan just to goof off and post memes and shit, and posting crazy shit that you'd never want to be associated with, even as a "joke". I can't see any normal person posting threats against other individuals like that as joke.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

What? Everybody has to be 100% behind Anita? How is this in any way at all right?

I mean I don't care if any company decides to make that statement, whatever it's all on them. But the situation will never ever be that you're either with Anita or you're damaging the industry.


You don't have to agree with Anita in order to be against death threats of any kind.

It stems from the 'You're either with us or against us' mentality, where neutrality is being against a side. It's a pretty nasty line of thought.

 

[Kinyou]

Why not both a collective and individual? Why should one exclude the other? And what does their motivations for being the first have to do with the signal they are sending? The more, the merrier, I don't care about their motivations, all I care about is that they do not remain silent and implicitly condone the harmful and hurtful status quo.

Well you keep saying that they remain silent, but that's only if you're ignorant and don't know what the ESA is. I feel like you're exaggerating their apathy. From their perspective it makes sense to me to do it that way, especially when theyre only tangentially connected to the whole thing.

 

[Buzzman]

Back to Jack Thompson, funny thing is, looking through some of his past actions it seems like he has the same opinion on "SJW" as the majority of GamerGate.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/08/14/Players-as-young-as-12-and-13-are-being-raped-by-dorky-weirdos-on-Grand-Theft-Auto


http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/09/01/Lying-Greedy-Promiscuous-Feminist-Bullies-are-Tearing-the-Video-Game-Industry-Apart

But he doesn't like feminists so he's a good guy in their book.

 

[Lime]

Is there anyway for companies to express that they support the cause but not Anita?
Personally, as much as I support the cause, I just can't support Anita's view on this matter wholly.

What? Everybody has to be 100% behind Anita? How is this in any way at all right?

I mean I don't care if any company decides to make that statement, whatever it's all on them. But the situation will never ever be that you're either with Anita or you're damaging the industry.

You don't have to agree with Anita in order to be against death threats of any kind.

*sigh* No, you don't need to agree with Sarkeesian's analysis to condemn the death threats she receives and support the inclusion and safety of her in video game spaces.

 

[hipbabboom]

I wonder if there should be a congressional hearing where game companies come out to denounce the death threats. We can even make a list of the companies who don't officially make a stand.

We can even form a movement where we remind consumers about who the companies who haven't spoken out against death threats are. No gamer would buy a game from a company who doesn't speak out against people who make death threats and also play games.

We can save this blueprint for later.

 

[THRILLH0]

Why is it game publishers duty to comment on this? Should the NFL speak out when their fans do something stupid?

If there was an organised movement to harass female fans at games you can bet your ass the NFL and teams would speak out.

 

[Rubius]

IT LITERALLY STARTED AS A MOVEMENT AGAINST ZOE QUINN. It was never about goddamn ethics.

Wasnt the movement against Zoe Quinn getting favors from a guy she slept with? It then evolved into the transparency issue.

Just like a lot of stuff, they start as something and end up as something else. Gum and duct tape were never supposed to end up as Gum and Duct tape and were both accidents.

Zoe Quinn have haters, sure. She's a really out there person so she will get threats. Total Biscuit get threats too. So does the Amazing Atheist and probably the owner of Neogaf itself. Hell, I have haters myself simply for having the same name as a Spanish Youtube star. I got threats too. I got threats when I speak with a french accent online. People will threaten people just for fun or just because they dont like it.

There was a guy that spent 7 months in jail for making a joke about how he was going to blow up a school in LoL. He was sarcastic, but hey Poe's law.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

*sigh* No, you don't need to agree with Sarkeesian's analysis to condemn the death threats she receives and support the inclusion and safety of her in video game spaces.

They probably do condemn the death threats against her. I assume every gaffer condemn the death threats against her, but I don't see you trying to get every single gaffer to post that they condemn it.

Unless a game company says otherwise, it's safe to say they condemn the death threats she's gotten.

 

[Teremap]

Then why is half of Neogaf not violent mass murderers? Growing up on ultra violent video games such as Mortal Kombat and Doom.

EDIT: I am not trying to be difficult, I just can't find conclusive evidence on the causation of these issues related to video games.

You're completely missing the point.

The point is NOT that sexism is somehow harmful or perpetuating sexism in those who play it. The problem is that use of sexist tropes decreases the quality of the game itself through the laziness of their use, as well as discouraging female players (and male players who can analyze that shit) from playing their games because they're so gross about their depiction of women. In other words, it's non-inclusive.

Pointing this shit out and preventing them from being used in future games only increases the quality of said games for everybody involved.

 

[Lime]

Well you keep saying that they remain silent, but that's only if you're ignorant and don't know what the ESA is. I feel like you're exaggerating their apathy. From their perspective it makes sense to me to do it that way, especially when theyre only tangentially connected to the whole thing.

They're individually silent. It's not the responsibility of New York Times to spread the messages of these companies - they have their own PR departments trained to do this.

Look, Kinyou. I've given many examples now of why it is a good thing to stand up and denounce Gamergate.

• I feel scared that being a woman isn't helped and supported by the games industry, media and culture when you're facing terrorism.
• I am worried that these significant companies aren't doing anything in the face of a pack of terrorists cultivated in the vacuum left by constantly being silent about bigoted attitudes in video games.
• I am afraid that moderates and neutral will remain uninformed and indecisive in a matter that is really clear-cut: that this movement is physically and psychologically harming people who can't even live in their own homes or fulfil their personal dreams in video games because of a sizeable amount of bigots along with a status quo oppressing anyone who isn't the default human being within the video games industry.

If you cannot acknowledge the above fears, along with the many reasons I've stated several times throughout this thread and see why it is a good thing to speak up by these power holders and influential companies, I am afraid we can't progress our conversation.

 

[BanGy.nz]

Wasnt the movement against Zoe Quinn getting favors from a guy she slept with? It then evolved into the transparency issue.

No

 

[pantsmith]

Companies that are quiet on this issue are essentially saying:

"Status quo is fine"
"This doesn't affect us"
"We don't care"

None of these are an acceptable response to what has been going on over the last several months.

"#gamergate" is a ridiculous spectacle that should be ignored until it curls up and dies. To say a company has to respond on death threats, let alone caustic circle jerking, OR ELSE come off as condoning it is about as absurd and hyperbolic as comparing Zoe Quinn's sex life to fucking Watergate.

 

[Teremap]

"#gamergate" is a ridiculous spectacle that should be ignored until it curls up and dies. To say a company has to respond on death threats, let alone caustic circle jerking, OR ELSE come off as condoning it is about as absurd and hyperbolic as comparing Zoe Quinn's sex life to fucking Watergate.

Ignoring abuse does not stop it from happening.

 

[fernoca]

I...don't expect them to say much, other than a generic response against this kind of action.

They don't have to.

A problem is that many are trying to force this to "gamers". That "gamers" are making this threats, and that they are a problem because of "gaming".

Anita's videos are watched by many members of different media. From Movies, music, arts...to people involved with sexism, discrimination, etc.

 

[danm999]

Wasnt the movement against Zoe Quinn getting favors from a guy she slept with? It then evolved into the transparency issue.

Besides it being total horseshit, shouldn't the journalist (you know, the one who would have violated a code of ethics and who had the actual influence and status) she slept with have been the focus of a campaign about concern for journalistic ethics and transparent disclosure?

I mean, you have to be very, very naive to think this isn't a slut shaming, misogynistic attack that spawned the movement.

 

[GuessMyUserName]

*sigh* No, you don't need to agree with Sarkeesian's analysis to condemn the death threats she receives and support the inclusion and safety of her in video game spaces.

... Right. So you're agreeing with my post. Not sure what you're sighing at me for then.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Simply keeping silent on the online terrorism of women in the culture of video games is not going to help anyone except the bigots. This is the consensus among research into victims of both offline and online harassment/terrorism.

Most people don't accept bigots and neither do they sympathize with people making rape and death threats. Hearing that GG is demonstratively a hate campaign would make sure not only that people capable of empathy won't join the movement, and it would send a signal of approval to the ones being victimized throughout this shitfest.

Who knows, making people aware of the problem might even push towards change.

Staying silent is not the course of action. There are so many convincing reasons to speak up about this.

I definitely understand where you're coming from. I've been reading opinions from people from both sides of those theories. Those that seem to agree with you feel that the best way to end this is by showing in numbers. And by also showing that not only do those that agree with Anita's video but those that disagree with them are also in support. Just to show how united everyone is. But the other opinion seems to be that a major part of this is trolling and the worst thing you can do with trolls is to give them attention as it just makes them crave it even more. So that's why I was asking what people would end it.

Really? If the media you consume has sexist views don't see how you wouldn't be influenced by it. A person raised on racist media would probably turn racist.

Why is entertainment being put in the role of raising people? That's the job of parents and it should always be the job of parents. If they do their job then no game, movie, book or music is going to reshape their thoughts. The people doing this or throwing around racist remarks on Twitter were very likely raised in homes where their mother or sisters were disrespected and where racist language was thrown around commonly. That why they have no problem going on Twitter or Facebook an expressing those views because those following them are their friends and family and most likely share those same hateful views.

 

[DICKS AHOY]

I've posted on 4chan before, but I never once thought "gee, it'd be funny if I pretend to threaten a person!". There's a huge difference between going to 4chan just to goof off and post memes and shit, and posting crazy shit that you'd never want to be associated with, even as a "joke". I can't see any normal person posting threats against other individuals like that as joke.

Mostly why I stick with /co/ and /v/ is mostly just where I go for a few laughs when it's not killing itself from the inside-out with this sort of stuff.

Though even /co/ isn't immune from this stuff all the time; the Skyler Page incident from a couple months back, whether it was a flood of people from /pol/ or not, was embarrassing to see play out the way it did there. Still, I tend to see animators/writers/creators way more willing to admit they browse that forum (Art of AT book even admits this) than other parts of 4chan.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

Mostly why I stick with /co/ and /v/ is mostly just where I go for a few laughs when it's not killing itself from the inside-out with this sort of stuff.

Though even /co/ isn't immune from this stuff all the time; the Skyler Page incident from a couple months back, whether it was a flood of people from /pol/ or not, was embarrassing to see play out the way it did there. Still, I tend to see animators/writers/creators way more willing to admit they browse that forum (Art of AT book even admits this) than other parts of 4chan.

/v/ isn't that bad.

When discussing certain games, like Ace Combat, everyone is civil and the energy is vibrant. Too many people give it a bad rap because they think it's a hivemind. It's no more of a hivemind than GAF is.

 

[Rubius]

Besides it being total horseshit, shouldn't the journalist (you know, the one who would have violated a code of ethics and who had the actual influence and status) she slept with have been the focus of a campaign about concern for journalistic ethics and transparent disclosure?

I mean, you have to be very, very naive to think this isn't a slut shaming, misogynistic attack that spawned the movement.

Sure. 4chan like to be able to attack people. Even more Zoe Quinn who went against Jon Tron, a really popular husbando on 4chan. They did the same with Total Biscuit and went full on when they found on he had colon cancer. The journalist also got stuff, but Zoe is the real celebrity, even more after the Game Jam from Polaris falling down because she had trouble with Jontron and a guy from Pepsi who was looking for action.

The origin of the movement do not really matter. If a murder spark light on corruption, it does not make the corruption not exist. Zoe Quinn haters found out she had relations with a journalist who gave her free publicity and good reviews, this sparked the debate. I do not deny reality like that, but calling the movement mysogynic based on the beginning of the movement do not make sense.

 

[USC-fan]

You're completely missing the point.

The point is NOT that sexism is somehow harmful or perpetuating sexism in those who play it. The problem is that use of sexist tropes decreases the quality of the game itself through the laziness of their use, as well as discouraging female players (and male players who can analyze that shit) from playing their games because they're so gross about their depiction of women. In other words, it's non-inclusive.

Pointing this shit out and preventing them from being used in future games only increases the quality of said games for everybody involved.

Then do not buy it. I do not think it fair that game creators should have to create their game a certain way.

This is VERY slippery slope....

Seem this is the new "video game are too violent"

 

[unround]

Wasnt the movement against Zoe Quinn getting favors from a guy she slept with? It then evolved into the transparency issue.

Except those 'favors' never actually happened. This entire movement was based on falsehoods that were used as an excuse to attack a woman, and attacking women is essntially all they've done since.

Edit: I probably should have checked what you were posting ITT before responding. Considering that you unironically used a voice for men as a source I think I've figured out why you support gamergate