Support NeoGAF

[Primethius]

Well of course. Live and let live is how I operate. I have nothing to do with GG nor do I want anything to do with them. However, I AM a male, a gamer, and recently have seen repeated posts discussing how privileged I allegedly am. I can see perfectly well why GG exists; because the perception is that the gaming Media has ran with it and is implying censorship is needed, because male gamers were always a lower class of human and we need to be told what we can enjoy in private.

You can say I am making this up, that I am delusional. That gamers had never been mistreated despite talks in this very thread that used the "N" word un-ironically. Well you can say any number of things, but you can't change feelings. Feeling are hurt here, and it isn't going to get any better by villafication of male gamers.

Yes, GG are horrible people. But I don't see people criticising GG without also insulting all male gamers at the same time. As I say, I am used to this unfair treatment. Just... don't tell me how lucky I am. That IS adding insult to injury.

Wow, this is such a ridiculous post that I don't even know how to approach it.

 

[Aaronrules380]

The fact that she leaves in a country with freedom of speech?

But you seem to be misunderstanding something: Free speech only applies to people who agree with you

 

[Oersted]

I never said that a game has the right to be successful. Most games ever made, fail. I don't know why you think just because you made the game that you want to make, that it means it would also be successful. Commercial success has nothing to do with creator's choice of product.

Making a successful game is hard enough. If you want to succeed commercially AND make the game that you want to make, good luck you will need it. My point is that you can make any game you want, but making a living off it is an unrelated issue.

GG attacking games they deemed their enemies? That's internet being internet. Some people have too much free time. I just play games, I have no intention to attack complete strangers as long as I am left alone. But the "male privilege" thread on Gaf a while back grind my gears, as such I decided to say something.

Harassing, doxxing and threatening gamers like Zoe Quinn is Internet being Internet (and not Gamergate being Gamergate), but Zoe Quinn criticising games (where has she done this) is censorship that needs to be stopped?

Am I getting you right?

 

[Glittering Crux]

Brianna Wu is such a faker.

 

[Lime]

Some of my colleagues in game dev are super afraid of saying *anything* that gets recorded or published or tweeted that is even remotely attached to Gamergate because of fear of terrorism.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Unless I misundestood him, he didn't say she was the cause it. He was merely pointing out that stuff like that doesn't help, which I agree with

What would help is if people wouldn't harass her endlessly over dumb shit in the first place.

Brianna Wu is such a faker.

And you're the real deal, right

 

[laser]

Brianna Wu is such a faker.

Care to back this statement up with anything?

 

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Why is that not censorship then?

Well yes, yes it is censorship. Never said it isn't. I never said I support GG either. Then again, those games are still for sale.

 

[Ala Alba]

Just wanted to say I really appreciate your concise take on the GG identity. (IMO) it rings very true.

Thank you. There may be some element of "lonely antisocial raging misogynists" in GamerGate, but I really don't think that's the core of it.

I can completely understand and empathize with the idea of fearing for the continuing existence of games that you currently enjoy, however, because of the many types of games that I enjoy yet aren't really being made anymore (because they didn't sell well enough, mainly).

It's like all the "There should be a Legend of Zelda game where Link is a girl" threads. I like my Link as a teenaged boy, and if I seriously thought that there was a chance that Nintendo would change that (as opposed to, say, making a LoZ game with a different, non-Link female protagonist like Zelda) I would probably be upset with the people trying to make it happen.

Just not enough to attack people, though.

 

[Oersted]

Well of course. Live and let live is how I operate. I have nothing to do with GG nor do I want anything to do with them. However, I AM a male, a gamer, and recently have seen repeated posts discussing how privileged I allegedly am. I can see perfectly well why GG exists; because the perception is that the gaming Media has ran with it and is implying censorship is needed, because male gamers were always a lower class of human and we need to be told what we can enjoy in private.

You can say I am making this up, that I am delusional. That gamers had never been mistreated despite talks in this very thread that used the "N" word un-ironically. Well you can say any number of things, but you can't change feelings. Feeling are hurt here, and it isn't going to get any better by villafication of male gamers.

Yes, GG are horrible people. But I don't see people criticising GG without also insulting all male gamers at the same time. As I say, I am used to this unfair treatment. Just... don't tell me how lucky I am. That IS adding insult to injury.

What happened to you?

 

[inpHilltr8r]

Being in the industry, this situation really fucking sucks because the available talent pool (of ACTUAL talent) was already small.

Of course, AAA doesn't care and is in fact complicit, so...

Speaking as developer at a AAA studio, what is this supposed to mean?

 

[leadbelly]

Number seven is hilarious. I can't tell if this person is very mentally ill, or the most dedicated troll of all time. It's all written in a rather Maddox-like fashion.

Yeah. He is a diagnosed schizophrenic, apparently. However, parts of it does seem accurate though. He wasn't on his way to kill her, he was on his way to a street race. The way Brianna presents it, you kind of assume he is on his way to kill her. To "deliver justice".

The week before last, I went to court to file a restraining order against a man who calls himself "The Commander." He made a video holding up a knife, explaining how he'll murder me "Assassin's Creed Style." He wrecked his car en route to my house to "deliver justice." In logs that leaked, he claimed to have weapons and a compatriot to do a drive-by.

For that reason, I think I will wait until more develops before passing judgement. The way she presents the other incidents I have no idea, I don't know if the video of the original death threat exists. I think it was a live stream.

He does sound fucking mental though, so it is understandable for her to be alarmed either way.

 

[remz]

Well of course. Live and let live is how I operate. I have nothing to do with GG nor do I want anything to do with them. However, I AM a male, a gamer, and recently have seen repeated posts discussing how privileged I allegedly am. I can see perfectly well why GG exists; because the perception is that the gaming Media has ran with it and is implying censorship is needed, because male gamers were always a lower class of human and we need to be told what we can enjoy in private.

You can say I am making this up, that I am delusional. That gamers had never been mistreated despite talks in this very thread that used the "N" word un-ironically. Well you can say any number of things, but you can't change feelings. Feeling are hurt here, and it isn't going to get any better by villafication of male gamers.

Yes, GG are horrible people. But I don't see people criticising GG without also insulting all male gamers at the same time. As I say, I am used to this unfair treatment. Just... don't tell me how lucky I am. That IS adding insult to injury.

Are you using N word to refer to "nerd"

There's another, far worse N word in the wild.

I don't think nerd is even an insult anymore. Certainly when compared to the real N word. Certainly when compared to the harassment and oppression Brianna Wu and developers like her receive on a daily basis.

I think this a really ridiculous thing to say.

 

[Aaronrules380]

What other people? And what is your problem with GG discussion being on "entirely negative terms" if, as you say here, there's nothing positive about it?

I think there could be an arguement made that although we definitely hold the moral high ground, the nature of our reaction, while the feelings themselves are not unjustified, are not very mature either. Not on the same level as GamerGate, or anywhere near there, but not on the level we should be striving for either. Even if you're right, the nature of the approach is important, and there is an arguement that the way we react to gamergate just causes them to get more defensive, which just makes them reinforce their beliefs

 

[Toxi]

Brianna Wu is such a faker.

Faker? I think you're the fake hedgehog around here.

 

[danm999]

Well yes, yes it is censorship. Never said it isn't. I never said I support GG either.

So then what's the difference between absolutely any criticism of any facet of a game and censorship?

Have you never made a critical post about a game? Expressed a critical thought?

Then again, those games are still for sale.

Which game isn't?

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

Understanding the movement is easy, and most people are very aware of why they act like they do. But that doesn't mean we should accept or tolerate the behavior. It might mean we should reevaluate the approach we're taking and find a way to act that will seem less threatening to them while still serving our purposes. GamerGate is a highly insular, incredibly defensive and closed group. Because they feel threatened, and because of group think within the group, it's come to a point where you can't really use facts or logic to reason with them. Arguing with these things just makes them defensive, which ultimately just leads to them reinforcing their beliefs inside their own heads. Which isn't to say we should do nothing, but just that we should think about what the best course of action is. In general, it's probably best to use GamerGate to spread awareness of the issue's existance, while focusing on educating kids. Most of the people at GamerGate will never be convinced by us, so it's better to find ways to prevent as many people as possible from becoming that type of person

I'm totally on board with this, though I do wonder to what extent we actually do understand the movement. For a while, it seems to me, Gamergate was a sort of combination of multiple different trends: the hard core of harassers and conspiracy theorists, a sort of broader penumbra of annoyed anti-feminists, and meddling interlopers from right-wing politics. Now it's shrunk to the first group, I think in part because it's the only group still interested (it is by definition the group that will never lose interest). But who are these people actually, in real life? There's a tendency to think that they're largely adolescents, for example - but do we know that?

I'm very frequently reminded of this Japanese phenomenon of extremely marginalized young men called hikikomori that an anthropologist friend told me about, but I don't think we understand our hikikomori that well.

 

[Glittering Crux]

Care to back this statement up with anything?

Did Brianna back hers up?

Please ban me. You guys and your circle jerking are so idiotic. This place was never a good place to discuss games, but post-GamerGate it's become even more of a hugbox and far worse than it ever was.

 

[CambriaRising]

Reading that makes me sad. I knew this was happening on a subconscious level but to see it is like..

Edit: Jesus Christ at the post above mine.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Speaking as developer at a AAA studio, what is this supposed to mean?

It means AAA pubs and marketing have cultivated this persona of a gamer that people like Gaters cling to and have substituted as their human identities. They wanted to cement a slavishly loyal demo to ensure their profits and this is one of the results.

Devs are a separate issue

 

[The Technomancer]

I think there could be an arguement made that although we definitely hold the moral high ground, the nature of our reaction, while the feelings themselves are not unjustified, are not very mature either. Not on the same level as GamerGate, or anywhere near there, but not on the level we should be striving for either. Even if you're right, the nature of the approach is important, and there is an arguement that the way we react to gamergate just causes them to get more defensive, which just makes them reinforce their beliefs

I used to feel like that. Nowadays that feels like the "unreasonable standard of reasonableness". Its something to strive for certainly.

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

Well of course. Live and let live is how I operate. I have nothing to do with GG nor do I want anything to do with them. However, I AM a male, a gamer, and recently have seen repeated posts discussing how privileged I allegedly am. I can see perfectly well why GG exists; because the perception is that the gaming Media has ran with it and is implying censorship is needed, because male gamers were always a lower class of human and we need to be told what we can enjoy in private.

You can say I am making this up, that I am delusional. That gamers had never been mistreated despite talks in this very thread that used the "N" word un-ironically. Well you can say any number of things, but you can't change feelings. Feeling are hurt here, and it isn't going to get any better by villafication of male gamers.

Yes, GG are horrible people. But I don't see people criticising GG without also insulting all male gamers at the same time. As I say, I am used to this unfair treatment. Just... don't tell me how lucky I am. That IS adding insult to injury.

what the hell does this have to do with anything? As a male, a gamer, and person of color, even I can admit that I'm privelidged to some things in this medium that women are not. No matter how many people call me the N word in a voice chat, I don't have to ever fear for my life, because of my gender.

Privelidge is not some rigid duality that exists in absolution. Yes, I will tell you that you ARE lucky, because it's the truth.

 

[remz]

Did Brianna back hers up?

Please ban me. You guys and your circle jerking are so idiotic. This place was never a good place to discuss games, but post-GamerGate it's become even more of a hugbox and far worse than it ever was.

I thought you were joking lmao.

 

[Oersted]

Well yes, yes it is censorship. Never said it isn't. I never said I support GG either. Then again, those games are still for sale.

What is your problem?

 

[QaaQer]

Speaking as developer at a AAA studio, what is this supposed to mean?

Maybe that there are very few J. Blows, P. Fishes, and Notches in the world, and that there would be more of that type if the talent was coming from 100% of the population instead of just 50%.

 

[Lime]

Ala Alba, the fact that you think anyone is saying you're wrong for liking certain things that get criticized by feminist voices seems me that you are fundamentally misunderstanding what these voices are saying.

No one is trying to take anyone's toys away. It's entirely fine and acceptable to like or consume problematic media. That's not what the criticisms are about. So understanding where some of these people are coming from (including many people on GAF who can't even handle Sarkeesian and a bunch of YouTube videos) is not about agreeing with their stance, but seeing their complete misunderstanding and implicitly self-centered view on media and accepting criticisms of what they like.

 

[Aaronrules380]

I'm totally on board with this, though I do wonder to what extent we actually do understand the movement. For a while, it seems to me, Gamergate was a sort of combination of multiple different trends: the hard core of harassers and conspiracy theorists, a sort of broader penumbra of annoyed anti-feminists, and meddling interlopers from right-wing politics. Now it's shrunk to the first group, I think in part because it's the only group still interested (it is by definition the group that will never lose interest). But who are these people actually, in real life? There's a tendency to think that they're largely adolescents, for example - but do we know that?

I'm very frequently reminded of this Japanese phenomenon of extremely marginalized young men called hikikomori that an anthropologist friend told me about, but I don't think we understand our hikikomori that well.

I mean yeah, those are true. And when I say we understand them, I mean we understand the basic mindset and ideas that caused this sort of reaction. Obviously there's a lot of other stuff we don't and can't really understand fully, such as the feelings and backgrounds that have led to these results. And I'm sure there is a large number of adults in there numbers, though I think most cases still stem from feelings and experiences rooted in adolecense

 

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Thank you. There may be some element of "lonely antisocial raging misogynists" in GamerGate, but I really don't think that's the core of it.

I can completely understand and empathize with the idea of fearing for the continuing existence of games that you currently enjoy, however, because of the many types of games that I enjoy yet aren't really being made anymore (because they didn't sell well enough, mainly).

It's like all the "There should be a Legend of Zelda game where Link is a girl" threads. I like my Link as a teenaged boy, and if I seriously thought that there was a chance that Nintendo would change that (as opposed to, say, making a LoZ game with a different, non-Link female protagonist like Zelda) I would probably be upset with the people trying to make it happen.

Just not enough to attack people, though.

Yeah, the "this popular game need to change the male lead into a girl" is one common example. The threads are treated seriously, there are actual people who think there is no issue hijacking existing franchises because they think a male lead is WRONG.

Which is ironic as I actually nearly always pick the female character, when ever there was a choice of gender in a game. I just have an issue with the mentality behind the argument for the main character gender change; that it is somehow about correcting a wrong, that the games had been doing something bad because Link and Mario are men. That being a male character is inherently worse.

I just can't accept that.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

This is a valuable point, and it's relevant to more than just gender in gaming arguments. We're at a sort of troublesome moment in our culture where mainstream left-wing discourse has been adopting and valorizing various illiberal intellectual tendencies. That's where this spate of articles in mainstream left-wing publications worrying about the consequences of the resurgence of political correctness etc etc is coming from.

There's a latent sense in Gamergate discussions that any attempts to understand the movement in anything but wholly negative terms, any attempts to problematize the arguments made "against Gamergate," signify an underlying sympathy towards or affiliation with Gamergate, or an opposition to gender equality.

It's crippling to any worldview to be unable to distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable criticism, to be unable to restrain itself from gradually expanding the domain of "unreasonable criticism" until there is nothing else.

While true, this can only happen in an environment that fosters good faith discussion. Last month, I was reading a book about the rising anger in America's white, middle class, and the author went out to various fringe groups such as MRAs, KKKs and others and simply talked to them, to learn the roots and causes of their anger. By humanizing these people, it allows us to understand how they turned out so wrong and to help prevent that in the future.

The difference however, is the author had the opportunity to write his thoughts in a book, with all the safety and calm that comes with the medium. On the internet, bad faith discussion is the usual M.O. Just look at how many posters come in during every GG thread to try downplay the harassment or argue that it was the victim's fault.

 

[faceless007]

Absolutely. But it's also a very good summary of a lot of anti-Gamergate, and that's much more troubling. Any reactionary movement, which Gamergate certainly is, can be expected to be illiberal and totalitarian. That's just the nature of the beast. Left-wing illiberalism is much harder to come to grips with, at least for me.

A movement consisting of persistent, coordinated, and targeted strategies of doxxing, stalking, threatening, harassing, and attempts to silence and literally cut off the livelihoods of its intended victims is in no way less troubling than one that does not do those things (or worse things), certainly not just because you find it to be expected behavior. This is accepting your implicit premise that "anti-GG" is a discrete movement that can be quantified like GG which it really can't.

 

[Kinsei]

what the hell does this have to do with anything? As a male, a gamer, and person of color, even I can admit that I'm privelidged to some things in this medium that women are not. No matter how many people call me the N word in a voice chat, I don't have to ever fear for my life, because of my gender.

Privelidge is not some rigid duality that exists in absolution. Yes, I will tell you that you ARE lucky, because it's the truth.

I think the N word he's referring to is nerd, not the actual N word.

 

[Neiteio]

Well of course. Live and let live is how I operate. I have nothing to do with GG nor do I want anything to do with them. However, I AM a male, a gamer, and recently have seen repeated posts discussing how privileged I allegedly am. I can see perfectly well why GG exists; because the perception is that the gaming Media has ran with it and is implying censorship is needed, because male gamers were always a lower class of human and we need to be told what we can enjoy in private.

You can say I am making this up, that I am delusional. That gamers had never been mistreated despite talks in this very thread that used the "N" word un-ironically. Well you can say any number of things, but you can't change feelings. Feeling are hurt here, and it isn't going to get any better by villafication of male gamers.

Yes, GG are horrible people. But I don't see people criticising GG without also insulting all male gamers at the same time. As I say, I am used to this unfair treatment. Just... don't tell me how lucky I am. That IS adding insult to injury.

Confused about the bolded bit. Who here used the n-word?

Or do you mean the word "nerd?" In which case, I think some clarification is in order. There are plenty of "nerds" who are perfectly good and worthwhile people. (Heck, virtually everyone on this board is a nerd!) Same for people with depression, or loner tendencies, etc. No one is saying they're all bad. They're just different emotionally, and that's fine.

But like any group of people, there are ones who think and act negatively toward themselves and others. That's the off-putting kind we're seeing with much of GG.

I agree that anti-GG should be careful not to unwittingly stigmatize an entire group that includes many innocent people ("nerds" and such) when they're really targeting a small group of bad apples (GG). But at the end of the day, I think we all know what we're talking about -- a shared disdain for what is essentially terrorism.

Of course, I could be misreading you completely, but "nerd" was the only n-word I could find in this thread.

 

[The Technomancer]

Yeah, the "this popular game need to change the male lead into a girl" is one common example. The threads are treated seriously, there are actual people who think there is no issue hijacking existing franchises because they think a male lead is WRONG.

Which is ironic as I actually nearly always pick the female character, when ever there was a choice of gender in a game. I just have an issue with the mentality behind the argument for the main character gender change; that it is somehow about correcting a wrong, that the games had been doing something bad because Link and Mario are men. That being a male character is inherently worse.

I just can't accept that.

When has anyone ever said it "needs" to be a girl? I see plenty of threads saying that it would be great if they were a girl, or that there should be a female option

 

[Northeastmonk]

A lot of people do things deliberately. A lot of bullying can't always be helped. I can't say I haven't been told "to give up" because a few people told me that. They would of told me more had I let them. When I was 12 I was more interested in gaming. I wasn't concerned about what I wanted to do in life.

Even when I was going to go for game design I was doing alright. No one told me no. Then it happened, I switched majors and now I get told that gaming is for people in their 20s, it's this and that, and its revolting knowing where I've been and what I've accomplished. I am still working on that original dream of mine. It's not about money or anything. I think anyone can put someone down regardless of who they are, how they act, and so forth. Do it for you.

I think there's average people looking down on game designers period or sometimes they are clueless on what to do or where to go. Like everything else it takes hard work and determination. I have no idea how some of these women got to feel like they can't. I've met women who were amazing artist, played games beyond my level, and etc. I think it needs to be generalized for people period. There's a lot of women who've done amazing work in the industry decades ago. Some women I've met felt like they hated gaming period or it was the last thing they'd ever do. It really comes down to how much you want to achieve because it ain't easy. It's not going to be handed to you over night, but it's not impossible either.

The biggest thing I see wrong with this is feeling sorry for yourself. If you want it, go out and get out. Do it. Start now.

 

[Lime]

Speaking as developer at a AAA studio, what is this supposed to mean?

If publishers and big studios spoke up and actively and economically did stuff, then this problem of explicit sexism would be less of a problem in our culture.

Just look at how gamergaters and the rest of the bigots react when blizzard or naughty dog say something that goes against their sexist worldviews.

 

[Ala Alba]

Ala Alba, the fact that you think anyone is saying you're wrong for liking certain things that get criticized by feminist voices seems me that you are fundamentally misunderstanding what these voices are saying.

Uh, no. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that there is a group of people (some of which back GamerGate) that do feel that way, however.

No one is trying to take anyone's toys away. It's entirely fine and acceptable to like or consume problematic media. That's not what the criticisms are about. So understanding where some of these people are coming from (including many people on GAF who can't even handle Sarkeesian and a bunch of YouTube videos) is not about agreeing with their stance, but seeing their complete misunderstanding and implicitly self-centered view on media and accepting criticisms of what they like.

For the most part, in the general sense, I completely agree. There probably are some people that do want to take those toys away, but I doubt they are even a proper subset of the people who are actually getting harassed.

 

[Aaronrules380]

I used to feel like that. Nowadays that feels like the "unreasonable standard of reasonableness". Its something to strive for certainly.

Oh, of course we'll never get everyone, or even a majority, acting completely mature on these issues, because they're very charged emotional issues and some of the stuff coming from the other side is straight up vile. I'll be perfectly honest and say I rarely live up to those standards myself in situations like this. Nobody is perfect, and even people capable of acting maturely on these issues will have breaking points and won't always be able to self-regulate. Though I think that just because reaching an ideal is probably impossible doesn't mean we should go easy on ourselves or stop aiming for it

 

[Oersted]

Yeah, the "this popular game need to change the male lead into a girl" is one common example. The threads are treated seriously, there are actual people who think there is no issue hijacking existing franchises because they think a male lead is WRONG.

Which is ironic as I actually nearly always pick the female character, when ever there was a choice of gender in a game. I just have an issue with the mentality behind the argument for the main character gender change; that it is somehow about correcting a wrong, that the games had been doing something bad because Link and Mario are men. That being a male character is inherently worse.

I just can't accept that.

You are fundamentally missunderstanding. Men being playable is not a problem, not something bad. Noone said or thought this. It is everyone who is not a white hetero male being underrepresented, which is the problem.

 

[Toxi]

Please ban me.

Count down to salty Kotaku in Action thread in 10, 9, 8, 7...

 

[laser]

Yeah, the "this popular game need to change the male lead into a girl" is one common example. The threads are treated seriously, there are actual people who think there is no issue hijacking existing franchises because they think a male lead is WRONG.

Which is ironic as I actually nearly always pick the female character, when ever there was a choice of gender in a game. I just have an issue with the mentality behind the argument for the main character gender change; that it is somehow about correcting a wrong, that the games had been doing something bad because Link and Mario are men. That being a male character is inherently worse.

I just can't accept that.

That's a big strawman you are setting to beat up. No one has said that.

 

[remz]

Which is ironic as I actually nearly always pick the female character, when ever there was a choice of gender in a game. I just have an issue with the mentality behind the argument for the main character gender change; that it is somehow about correcting a wrong, that the games had been doing something bad because Link and Mario are men. That being a male character is inherently worse.

I just can't accept that.

I don't think many, if any people have an issue with the male character. I do not think people see it as inherently wrong, or that Mario and Link are awful because they're men. A lot of girls and women love Zelda and I don't think they feel link as a fairly blank slate person is excluding them.

There are good male characters and bad male characters. How many leading males can you name off the top of your head? Now try that for female characters.

The issue is that in almost every games the male is the default, and that even if they wanted to play as a girl, there is no option. Women are like 50% ish of game players now and that number is not represented by protagonists they can play as. It's not that there is men. It's that there isn't girls.

I don't think it's a bad thing if there were more games with cool leading ladies tbh.

 

[KingFire]

Has she shared these stories with the public? I would like to read them with the names and addresses changed

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

Yeah, the "this popular game need to change the male lead into a girl" is one common example. The threads are treated seriously, there are actual people who think there is no issue hijacking existing franchises because they think a male lead is WRONG.

Which is ironic as I actually nearly always pick the female character, when ever there was a choice of gender in a game. I just have an issue with the mentality behind the argument for the main character gender change; that it is somehow about correcting a wrong, that the games had been doing something bad because Link and Mario are men. That being a male character is inherently worse.

I just can't accept that.

It's actually more about doing something new and interesting with a franchise. Playing as Zelda, for example, could allow for new mechanics and new storytelling options that you don't see with a Link focus. It's not that they 'hate men' or 'playing as a man is wrong' any such nonsense.

Now there is the argument that having every big title/franchise headlines by generic male characters is a problem, but that comes down to well, some marketing folks thinking that only games with male leads sell, and telling developers not to make female leads as a result. The result is bald space marine number 30 as a lead instead of someone more interesting. You see the same issue for racial representation in games. How many leads are clearly non-white racially? Why is there so few?

 

[VibratingDonkey]

Gamergate timeline for the blissfully ignorant, or for anyone really, there's quite a bit of stuff.
Summary: Gamergate's shit and anyone supporting it is an asshole.

Worth noting that TotalBiscuit is an asshole. Not because he's the worst one, but the biggest.

"You people"? LOL

I'm just saying it's not helping, yet I'm grouped in with pro-GG people? Are you serious?

This is why I like to stay out of this, both sides are just a headache.



Dead serious.

*badom-tish*

Fun Fact!
In the context of Gamergate, "Both Sides" is usually a punchline that signals the end to the joke of a gater pretending to not be one. It's a phrase commonly used by gaters attempting to argue that "both sides" are equal, the truth is in the middle, or some such bullshit.

I rate this phrase:

Especially after you've just made a petty complaint against a Gamergate target.

It was spawned as a result of 4chan (moot) banning Gamergate discussion, so they made an off-brand 4chan. Turns out not only is it a cesspool of regular pro-gg garbage, it also became a haven for fucked up child related images and the like.

Speaking of 8chan.
Moderator says he fled the country. Admin got rid of evidence. Exciting times ahead?

 

[Ala Alba]

Yeah, the "this popular game need to change the male lead into a girl" is one common example. The threads are treated seriously, there are actual people who think there is no issue hijacking existing franchises because they think a male lead is WRONG.

It may seem that way, but what they probably actually want is better representation in the games they already enjoy.

There is room for games with all kinds of protagonists, thankfully, so adding more protagonists that represent traditionally underrepresented groups can be done without taking anything away from anyone.

It's actually more about doing something new and interesting with a franchise. Playing as Zelda, for example, could allow for new mechanics and new storytelling options that you don't see with a Link focus. It's not that they 'hate men' or 'playing as a man is wrong' any such nonsense.

That isn't what people really get upset over, though. They don't get upset over the idea of a Legend of Zelda game where you play as Zelda (or Sheik, Impa, etc).

They get upset at the idea that you're trying to 'take' Link away from them by changing what they see as a core, essential part of the character.

(Still no reason to harass or attack people, though, just to keep that clear.)

 

[Nanashrew]

I can't even bring up the words to properly show my how awful I feel about all of this and how many creative voices and games we have now lost because of all of this crap =/

 

[KoopaTheCasual]

I think the N word he's referring to is nerd, not the actual N word.

...Whaat? Umm... ok. I guess I really don't know how to respond to that. At least he wasn't trying to half-ass the race card.

 

[Nanashrew]

"You people"? LOL

I'm just saying it's not helping, yet I'm grouped in with pro-GG people? Are you serious?

This is why I like to stay out of this, both sides are just a headache.



Dead serious.

Do you really want to stick to the both sides rhetoric knowing full well that GamerGate has a board specifically for doxxing and discussing who they'd like dead?

 

[Paper Sparrow]

Yeah, the "this popular game need to change the male lead into a girl" is one common example. The threads are treated seriously, there are actual people who think there is no issue hijacking existing franchises because they think a male lead is WRONG.

Which is ironic as I actually nearly always pick the female character, when ever there was a choice of gender in a game. I just have an issue with the mentality behind the argument for the main character gender change; that it is somehow about correcting a wrong, that the games had been doing something bad because Link and Mario are men. That being a male character is inherently worse.

I just can't accept that.

I don't think I have ever heard someone want a gender change for Mario and I am pretty sure the Link thing is because it's been established he is reincarnated so "why not?"

 

[AniHawk]

Yeah, the "this popular game need to change the male lead into a girl" is one common example. The threads are treated seriously, there are actual people who think there is no issue hijacking existing franchises because they think a male lead is WRONG.

Which is ironic as I actually nearly always pick the female character, when ever there was a choice of gender in a game. I just have an issue with the mentality behind the argument for the main character gender change; that it is somehow about correcting a wrong, that the games had been doing something bad because Link and Mario are men. That being a male character is inherently worse.

I just can't accept that.

i think you need to back up your thoughts about people saying men are inherently worse with actual evidence.

what i see, and what i would like to see, are different avenues to be explored. beyond good & evil may be the best game with a female protagonist in what is traditionally a male-dominated space. that came out over 10 years ago. consider the possibilities in storytelling, gameplay, and characterization that could have happened with more variation? imagine if beyond good & evil wasn't even made by mountain king michel ancel, but someone with completely different life experiences by having grown up female? think about how much more rich this industry would be just by exploring new ideas from so many people who in our reality, are scared away?

we lose. we lose for not having that, for shutting it out. and that's just on a completely selfish level. that's before we ever get into just the basic treatment of people and how we ought to be more accepting of them and their ideas.