Slarg232 wrote:
The problem with games like Depression Quest is that they don't actually raise awareness, especially when built like Depression Quest; People whom aren't aware aren't going to play it, people whom are don't need the messege, and no one is going to slog through text.

Zoë ʻwho?ʼ Quinn ‏@TheQuinnspiracy Sep 8
Hey remember the cries claiming I cherry picked the IRC logs? I was being too nice if anything: http://wehuntedthemammoth.com/2014/09/08/zoe-quinns-screenshots-of-4chans-dirty-tricks-were-just-the-appetizer-heres-the-first-course-of-the-dinner-directly-from-the-irc-log/ … #gamergate

 Talizvar wrote:
What a confusing mess #GamerGate has become:
- Find a bit of a juicy scandal with a female developer and the gaming media.
- Shines a light on how much gaming "journalism" is funded by content providers so the veneer of impartiality is thrown out the window.
- Gamers get all upset and post like crazy.
- Attempts at take-downs and censorship are applied (by various groups in question) and gaming community gets REALLY upset.
- So with the increased "hate" flying about #Notyourshield comes up with various other communities getting fed up with the garbage being written.
- Gaming media fights back claiming that the "gamer" is dead, there is no such thing now... still trying to wrap my brain around where that was going.

So where do we go from here?
Starve the various groups involved of clicks and sponsorship funding?
I figure the groups most willing to keep feeding the giant troll this has become are probably the ones we should most look at (Still liked some of Zoe's previous works but her latest media dalliances are showing some judgment issues...).

The best thing about all this is I had zero interest in gaming journalism before and having my attention drawn to them, I find precious little of interest now so all is well.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I have to say this is a rather interesting experience for me. I've never been generalized before. I think of myself as an equlitist (one who wants quality for everyone) and this is obviously searching for something to be mad about to make some money. There is not more misogyny in games than there is anywhere else.

The gaming press wants gamers to believe that the Zoe Quinn story is about her sex life and misogyny in the gaming community, but in reality they are trying to shield themselves from accusations of journalistic impropriety that they don’t want to address.
Zoe Quinn’s sex life is not the story here. While the accusation that Quinn’s relationship with Kotaku writer Nathan Grayson may have started this discussion about journalistic ethics and transparency, the fact is that Nathan Grayson never reviewed Quinn’s game, Depression Quest, or wrote about it again after beginning a sexual relationship with her. Had the gaming press left it at that, this story may have gone away, like so many other times in the past when readers have accused those they rely on to report on the gaming industry of being unduly influenced by the publishers and developers they are supposed to cover.
But they didn’t leave it alone, because the Zoe Quinn story raised questions that made the gaming press very, very uncomfortable, questions they did not want to acknowledge. So to try to keep the story from being about themselves, gaming journalists tried to make the story about their readers. They pushed back, and they pushed angrily and clumsily and ended up fanning long-simmering flames of resentment by attacking their readership. Instead of addressing concerns about the relationships between journalists and the people and projects they are trusted to write objectively about, they framed the story as being about misogynists who wanted to slut-shame female developers out of the industry.
Accusations of impropriety against game journalists are nothing new. In 2007, Jeff Gerstmann was fired by GameSpot after publishing a negative review of Eidos Interactive’s Kane and Lynch, a game that was heavily advertised by the publisher on the site. GameSpot claimed Gerstmann’s firing was not a consequence of his review, but in 2012 Gerstmann claimed that he was dismissed as a result of not only his Kane and Lynch review but other reviews whose scores had led to publishers pulling ad money from his employer.
In 2010, GamePro detailed the inner workings of controversial “review events,” in which publishers pay for travel and accommodations for journalists to trek to several day-long events in which they are allowed to play the latest big release in franchises like Call of Duty in carefully controlled environments. In addition to free travel and lavish hospitality, reviewers are often plied with expensive gifts. “[L]et's be very clear: these events are designed to wow and impress the reviewer. It's not a matter of fighting piracy, because the game had already been leaked. It's not a matter of just controlling the setting, because that can be done without putting a reviewer up in a country club for three nights. Publishers like Activision spend the money in order to squeeze out the best reviews possible, and to send an implicit message: take care of us, and we'll continue to take care of you,” Ben Kuchera wrote at Ars Technica at the time. “It's a tough choice: stick by your ethics policy, or accept a free vacation, some gifts, and boost your site's traffic.”
Is it likely that publishers directly pay for positive coverage and reviews? No. These are multiple-million dollar corporations operating on a global scale. They are too smart to engage in such blatant manipulation as to assign a monetary value for Game X to fall within a score of Y and Z. It’s the soft corruption, the promise of access and exclusivity, the suggestion of “take care of us, and we’ll take care of you” that has compromised the gaming community’s view of the gaming press over the years. The Zoe Quinn scandal reignited the debate about the legitimacy of gaming journalism while raising new questions about the interpersonal relationships between writers and the people within the industry that they cover.
Since the initial fervor in response to the details of Zoe Quinn’s sexual relationship with Nathan Grayson, a writer for Kotaku, and the media blackout of the entire story, gamers began digging into the relationships between reporters, public relations firms, developers, and publishers. There are a number of examples of seeming conflicts of interest to cite, such as Patricia Hernandez of Kotaku reviewing games created by Anna Anthropy, a friend and reportedly a former roommate, and Ben Kuchera, now at Polygon, writing about harassment of Zoe Quinn without disclosing he contributed money to her and her projects through Patreon. Both Kotaku and Polygon have since changed their policies to either ban writers from contributing to projects they write about or publicly disclose which games they have financially supported, although judging by Kuchera’s Twitter feed, he didn’t seem to take the accusations of a conflict of interest very seriously:

One of the more damaging entanglements appears to be the interpersonal relationships between Zoe Quinn, Maya Kramer of Silverstring Media, and Brandon Boyer, the chairman of the Independent Games Festival (IGF). The problem is that Silverstring Media is involved with a number of games judged and promoted by the IGF, of which Boyer is one of the principle judges. Adding to the controversy is the relationship between Kramer and her employer and a number of gaming outlets, such as Kotaku; on June 3, 2014 Silverstring Media promoted an article by Nathan Grayson of Kotaku claiming that the game Glitchhikers saved him from driving drunk and potentially killing himself or someone else. Glitchhikers just happens to be the very first game listed under the “Projects” section on Silverstring Media’s website.
Silverstring Media has since updated their site to claim they are not a public relations firm, despite Kramer claiming on her Patreon site that she does “PR and production” for independent game developers.
The gaming press’s response to these latest accusations of ethical violations ranged from patronizing to dismissive to openly mocking, but they all pushed the same message: this isn’t about us, it’s about you, the readers, and your terrible bigotry. Leigh Alexander wrote at Gamasutra: “These obtuse shitslingers, these wailing hyper-consumers, these childish internet-arguers -- they are not my audience… there is no ‘debate’ to be had.” At Polygon, Editor-at-Large Chris Plante created a false dichotomy: the side that has “folded its arms, slumped its shoulders while pouting like an obstinate child,” and the side that has “opened its arms, unable to contain its love and compassion, because they understand they are no longer alone.” Guess which side is the one Plante and other gaming journalists are supposed to represent?
Luke Plunkett of Kotaku played the aggrieved innocent bystander card, bemoaning: “There has been so much hate. So many angry words, so many accusations, over...what? Video games? Women in video games? People who write about video games?”
In an article patronizingly titled “Why I Feel Bad For - And Understand - The Angry #GamerGate Gamers,” Devin Faraci at least had the nerve to accuse readers of what all of these other writers cravenly insinuated: that the only issue here is that gamers are a bunch of fat, ugly social rejects who just want to beat up Zoe Quinn because they’re mad that women won’t sleep with them.
“For male geeks there’s a disconnect with what they’re told - be a nice guy and you’ll get the girl - and what they see in action around them. They get told lies that I think are really insidious, like ‘It doesn’t matter what’s on your outside, it matters what’s on your inside,’ which lead to entire affinity groups that dress and smell like gak and don’t take care of themselves,” he wrote. “This leads to a horrible cycle where socially awkward weirdos who dress like garbage get rejected by attractive women, which cause the socially awkward weirdos to start blaming women in general for their problems and reinforce their social awkwardness.” According to Faraci, “It all comes down, again and again, to the same problem: lonely boys who have no social skills who are wallowing in self-pity.”
These writers’ opinions of their readers’ social, sexual, and hygienic prowess has nothing to do with the issue at hand, but it’s a good play on their part; their insults will produce a fresh wave of vitriol from the reactionary members of the community that can be trotted out and used to paint their critics as hateful bigots. They know that’s exactly the response using terms like “shitslingers,” “devils,” and “hatemonger” will elicit. While their readers are busy defending themselves against such accusations, what they’re not doing is pressing these writers about the issues of journalistic integrity and transparency. And that’s the whole point.
However, the problem for game journalists is that this pushback was too coordinated and too obvious, and readers who no longer rely on one or two gaming sites for all of their exposure to gaming news quickly identified this unified front. Discussions about the Zoe Quinn story were initially censored and memory holed, as Breitbart News’ Milo Yiannopoulos covered. When that didn’t stop the story but only inflamed it, the gaming press pushed back in force to accuse “gamers” of misogyny, bigotry, and bullying, turning a term for their own audience into a dirty word. They were desperate to make the Zoe Quinn story simply about one woman’s sexual proclivities and place in the gaming industry, anything to distract from questions about journalists’ relationships with developers and publishers and how that might impact their reporting.
The problem for the gaming press is that the majority of those following GamerGate aren’t buying what they’re selling. This story is no longer about Zoe Quinn. The principle people still trying to bring her and her sexual affairs into this discussion are the gaming press; they are desperate to make GamerGate about anyone but themselves, and they are the ones who keep dragging Zoe Quinn’s sexual escapades into the forefront of the discussion to save themselves. By all means, let’s have a discussion about sexism, about women in the gaming industry, about expanding the themes and audience for games; we can and should discuss these issues to continue to grow this community and this industry, but understand that right now, in this moment, they are not the issues that are fueling GamerGate. These serious subjects are being used as a dodge, a shield to dismiss legitimate and pressing concerns and a wedge to divide the gaming community, and it cheapens what should be important and legitimate topics. The question of journalistic ethics and the influence of personal relationships on what is supposed to be impartial reporting needs to be answered.
Gamers are not “over,” they’re not going away, and they’re not the problem.

Gamergate and the RPS response
Published on Monday, September 08, 2014 By Frogboy In PC Gaming
Today Rock Paper Shotgun put up this article with regards to the recent turmoil in the gaming community: Videogames are for everybody.

Disclaimer:

RPS is one of my favorite game sites. RPS is not just “another game site”, they are very important to both game developers/publishers as well as gamers. I say this because they have assembled an exceptionally high quality team of writers and reviewers. Anyone who thinks getting people with good writing skills and good judgment is easy has clearly never run a business before.

Now..that said…

There are a lot of good parts to that article. But there are some parts that I’d like to address:

Claim: I don’t believe the harassment is real. People are faking it to get attention.

RPS Response: You are wrong. Sorry. We’re getting some of the abuse. John particularly has been told to kill himself multiple times, with specific, ugly descriptions of how, and been sent repeated wishes that he die of cancer. And those have been the extremes. There has also been a non-stop flow of lies spread about him and RPS, abuse sent to us, including alarming videos designed to discredit both John and RPS. Nothing fake about any of that.

This is the first element I took issue with. No one is claiming that nobody is getting harassed. This is a case where semantics actually matter. What gamers are getting tired of are certain female Internet celebrities trying to claim any harassment / trolling / flaming = sexual harassment and turning those claims into easy coverage for their (surprise surprise) upcoming new project. The media, predictably then responds lecturing gamers on their so-called misogyny.

As a reminder:

misogynist: Noun. A person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against women.



Gamer Claim: Your site is corrupt. We know this because of the evidence presented in various videos and diagrams and put together by concerned individuals.

RPS Response: We’ve seen all this material, too. If any of it genuinely exposed corrupt practice, or if any of it could be verified with concrete evidence, we’d surely act on it…

I don’t have any issue with this response. You don’t think there is any widespread journalism corruption. I tend to agree with this as well. I don’t think there’s systematic corruption with gaming journalism. This would have been a great response from the media two weeks ago.

..Instead, gamers were treated to THIS (courtesy of jw)

“‘Gamers’ don’t have to be your audience. ‘Gamers’ are over.” by Leigh Alexander (8/28, approx 10:28 AM):http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/224400/Gamers_dont_have_to_be_your_audience_Gamers_are_over.php
“The End of Gamers” by Dan Golding (8/28, no time):http://dangolding.tumblr.com/post/95985875943/the-end-of-gamers
“Gaming is Leaving ‘Gamers’ Behind’” by Joseph Bernstein (8/28, 3:29 PM): http://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/gaming-is-leaving-gamers-behind
“The death of the ‘gamers’ and the women who ‘killed’ them” by Casey Johnson (8/28, 7:00 PM): http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/08/the-death-of-the-gamers-and-the-women-who-killed-them/
“A Guide to Ending ‘Gamers’” by Devin Wilson (8/28, 7:57 PM):http://gamasutra.com/blogs/DevinWilson/20140828/224450/A_Guide_to_Ending_quotGamersquot.php
“We Might Be Witnessing The ‘Death of An Identity’” by Luke Plunkett (8/28, 8:00 PM): http://kotaku.com/we-might-be-witnessing-the-death-of-an-identity-1628203079
“This Guy’s Embarassing Relationship Drama Is Killing the ‘Gamer Identity’” by Mike Peark (8/29, no time): http://www.vice.com/read/this-guys-embarrassing-relationship-drama-is-killing-the-gamer-identity-828
“Why does the term ‘gamer’ feel important? There are gamers at the gate, but they may already be dead” by Johnathan Holmes (8/31, 7:30 PM): http://www.destructoid.com/why-does-the-term-gamer-feel-important--280451.phtml
The Monday Papers by Graham Smith (9/1, 7:00 PM):http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/09/01/the-monday-papers-4/(This piece covers some of the above works by Alexander, Golding)
The #Gamergate thing could be described in two parts:

First, the original allegations about Zoe Quinn which were a tempest in a teapot
and
Second, the absurd, embarrassing response by some in the gaming media.
It wasn’t until the second part that the media lost a lot of gamers and game developers and #gamergate really took off.

If someone makes allegations that there is corruption, the best way to deal with that is to answer it (like today’s RPS article tries to do). But that’s not what happened. Instead, the media smeared gamers.

So to recap, a bunch of gamers got upset at what appeared to them to be a pattern of corruption in the gaming media. And instead of addressing these concerns they got called (again, from jw).

Terrorists (http://gamesnosh.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/devin.jpg)

Pathetic (http://gamesnosh.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/freelance-dev.jpg)

Racist (http://gamergateharrassment.tumblr.com/image/96832821253)

Nerds (http://gamergateharrassment.tumblr.com/image/96824882816)

Parasites (http://i.imgur.com/YYx4VM3.png)

Worthless (http://38.media.tumblr.com/3f7e5d258c3590d92e21a91c941cfc48/tumblr_nbel0pMV3y1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

Deserving death (http://31.media.tumblr.com/05ce05fa39964870e51b029b76eb4453/tumblr_nbdot0XTYQ1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

Misogynists (http://33.media.tumblr.com/cc4523e7baa0c17108abeb7ee15f5537/tumblr_nbfbwtzOO01tkhroeo1_1280.png) (Note: I’ve been informed that this post may be a troll account. I’ll replace this example shortly, but I’m taking a break from the #GamerGate issue for a bit.)

Subhuman (http://i.gyazo.com/af9f579b915579b16382885ee071a8a6.png)

Sociopaths (http://31.media.tumblr.com/6b838763c2a04c7356eb12aac086d2d4/tumblr_nbdfr6ZW3f1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

Scum (http://i.imgur.com/rLT5hMG.png)

Morons (http://33.media.tumblr.com/839ef95775ce258ea9b69e3092b74c13/tumblr_nbaq6t5l8a1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

Fat (http://38.media.tumblr.com/c006886fc38d780246bb0541e2158026/tumblr_nbaprdoOzq1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

Nonexistent (http://38.media.tumblr.com/4f6b44d2d02dcf5637449c43f59081f0/tumblr_nbaraiM5CK1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

Hateful (http://38.media.tumblr.com/04d047edde4912a0ae1d08d5d34eb073/tumblr_nbavqcjInC1tkhroeo1_1280.jpg)

Autistic (http://38.media.tumblr.com/070bec77b1eb20d7127eeb53e24cd739/tumblr_nb9o4uaZLh1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

Deserving violence (http://media.tumblr.com/5fcf2906cbd6a4f0a2d0d118938a6647/tumblr_inline_nb9hwmg56l1t04v2j.png)

Bullies (http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/821/909/564.png)

Racial slurs (https://forum.encyclopediadramatica.es/attachments/1409516437457-png.47336/) (Note, the veracity of this instance is in question as a possible troll. The blog where I got it from, as with the rest of these,http://gamergateharrassment.tumblr.com/#, is unsure of the source. I’m leaving it up so as to not just pretend I didn’t post it, but I’m going to add that this link is questionable in intent.)

Enablers of child pornography/Pedophiles: (http://38.media.tumblr.com/60d8774d77925c6c2b33da61a320fcc9/tumblr_nbgx6jSebG1tkhroeo2_1280.png) (This added in replacement of the Racial Slurs one as an example of some of the vitriol.)

Manbabies (http://31.media.tumblr.com/7300d99c72d76c2a2b3b90d4c3f9d222/tumblr_nb4nduL6ik1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

Terrible people (http://38.media.tumblr.com/6f9fb624582e4d5a09ceb2174da96c18/tumblr_nb4rxxXlrK1tkhroeo1_1280.png)

And best of all — Trash: http://i.imgur.com/E4kRwKN.png

Needless to say, this upset some people.

You hate gamers. When we criticised you, you “spat on us”.

No, we don’t, and no, we didn’t. This statement is in quotation marks because that’s actually what someone said to us. That we spat on them. We understand that this person was speaking figuratively, but even so it does not reflect the truth. We banned people for being unexcellent on the forums and in comments, we blocked people attacking us on Twitter, and some of our writers expressed their frustration by lampooning what was said on social media. We make jokes when we’re unhappy, and we do tend to get sarcastic when faced with honest insults. It’s difficult.

All I can say to this is: See above.

We do not hate gamers. We object to, and will fight, harassment and abuse. But that has little to do with gamers, and little or nothing to do with the ethics of the games industry. Not everyone who objects to how the games press works are harassing and attacking, but the ones who are are causing enough disruption for this entire thing, whatever it actually is, to be a mess of resentment and recrimination. For any progress to be made, in any direction, it has to stop.

I would hate to get into a “but they started it” type of argument but, if game sites start publishing a mass string of articles claiming that anyone who is concerned that coverage is less about merit and more about who’s sleeping with who is really just a horrible misogynist and needs to grow up and get out of their parents basements, I think that the recipient of this abuse is going to not take that well.

The problem is this: If you insult enough people, eventually you will have a lot of opponents. I’m not referring to RPS but to the self-described “Social Justice Warrior” dominated press (I don’t really have any serious criticism of RPS specifically, I am just hoping they can see the 10,000 foot high picture of this). Five years ago I would have been a lot more sympathetic to the Social Justice Warriors. I wonder how many on the fence gamers the SJWs lost during the whole “Dick Wolves” insanity. Eventually, non-snowflakes get fatigued at the deluge of first-world victim/outrage stories – and don’t forget, if you complain, you are blaming the victim. Each time they smear someone, they lose another small group. Drip. Drip. Drip.

And it is. We love games. We hate harassment, prejudice, and abuse.

Most gamers hate harassment, prejudice and abuse too. So why are so many in the gaming media subjecting them to harassment, prejudice and abuse?

I know of many others who would be natural allies of “social justice warriors” but have suffered at the hands of sustained harassment and death threats courtesy of SJWs. So when they see the media march lockstep with these people, they think that either you guys aren’t aware of their true nature or worse, you think that death threats and harassment are fine as long as it’s against people who “deserve it”.

If anything good comes of this #gamergate debacle it’s this: It is likely that the SJW movement into the games industry has reached its furthest extent. They’ve managed to alienate a critical mass of people with their shenanigans.

I, like many others, wasn’t just neutral but didn’t really care until the August 28 deluge of insult articles appeared. That’s where you lost a lot of game developers. And make no mistake, like the gaming media, we have our own mailing lists as well and most, if not nearly all, were appalled by that series of articles.

RPS posts that contain controversy about sexism are just clickbait. You do not actually believe this stuff, and you are just doing it for hits.

Nope, we actually believe it. If you believe that we actually don’t, well, it’s going to be hard to change your mind. But there would be easier ways to generate traffic, with less abuse directed at us, if what was really on our minds was traffic. Why wouldn’t we just do that?

Good for them for saying this. And I agree. News items are much easier to get page views from than original content. It's one of those urban legends that game sites live/die on click bait.

You are doing it for sexual favours.

Wow. No.

Well I am. Winking smile

Nevertheless, I believe changing games will ruin them. They’re supposed to be about escapism.

Escapism is great! We love it. We all need to escape. Even the people analysing and criticising want to escape for a while. It’s a wonderful thing to be able to do. It’s not all that games can do, though, is it? Games can be about real world situations. The same systems that run games are used to train pilots and soldiers. Game developers are using them to talk about social situations, personal issues, and to explore the real world from an interactive perspective, just as books explore it from a literary perspective. There are games about politics and social lives, economies and history. Games are a big old toolbox, and using them as escapism is just one application. Let’s not limit them.

Women tend to like different types of games than men and vice versa. It has nothing to do with how “inclusive” the community is. 5 of the most popular games for women include Candy Crush, Bejweweled 2, Crosswords and Soduku, Cake Shop 2 and World of Warcraft (this is before Sims 4 was released). In short, generally speaking (WoW aside) women tend to like different games than men. And that’s fine.

Gaming really is for everyone. But gaming is a relationship between the people who make the games and the people who play them. The level of “inclusiveness” in the communities nor the sensitivity of the journalist has little to do with attracting women to a given game. It’s mostly the game itself. Is the game fun and interesting to a woman?

My disinterest in playing Cake Shop 2 is not because the women playing it are filled is misandry. It’s really not their fault.

This is horrible, why can’t we keep the politics out of games? Why can’t we just talk about the games?

This is one of those deeply tricky philosophy type things: not talking about politics is actually taking a political stance on them. It doesn’t keep the politics out. Tricky, right? It seems like a trick. But it’s really not: just talking about the games, without questioning anything, is you taking a political stance on games because it amounts saying that you completely accept the games at face value. Your stance on their politics is: this is fine. You can’t just talk about the games, because they can’t be pulled apart from the ideas and circumstances that brought them into being. You can ignore problems, or just not see them, and that’s okay. But if you talk about games, you talk about politics.

When we discuss how a woman is presented in a game we are talking about the game. She’s part of that game. If she’s a prostitute who gets killed by a pirate, then that happens in the game. That imaginary murder is part of the game content. Furthermore, games are not a disconnected dimension, even while they are being amazing escapist outlets for fantasy. They have a context. They reflect the world, and they are expressions of what the people made the game were trying to achieve. Some people want to examine that. They want to look at why a prostitute being murdered by a pirate is what happens in that game. They want to examine what it means. You don’t have to – it’s totally fine for you to enjoy whatever you like, and completely ignore any possible criticism, or even any possible meaning – but please don’t attack others for wanting to do so.

So basically this policy of “just talking about the games” isn’t really anything of the sort, and it can lead to saying that people who do analyse them politically, and point out how they might be problematic for themselves or others (if not for you) should shut up. It is silencing criticism, which is the thing that everyone wants to avoid. Let’s not do that, no matter what.

I think that’s all fine. But it seems like the gaming media can talk about things other than games without attacking their readers. The objection isn’t about whether there’s a discussion on whether murdering prostitutes should give you HP is a good for society or not. The objection is saying that people who play that game are bad people.

If we game a game that is offensive, then tell us. We can take it. To emphasize: Game developers have a tremendous level of respect for gaming sites like RPS. We trust you. Your candid article is great thing. I wish it had come out 3 weeks ago before the well was poisoned by a dozen+ “gamers are losers” articles.

Well, you still won’t engage the other side of the debate. Why isn’t that represented on RPS?

Because we are this side. Our own side. The chaotic nature of this debate, and the way it has been pursued, make things very difficult for us, but we’re doing our best to address some of it in this article. We already believe that we behave ethically, and don’t yet see anything that requires changing. If the current line up of issues could be separated from the abuse – as it clearly can and should be – then perhaps there would be something more concrete and useful to go on. Until that time, we can only present our editorial policy, and our philosophy towards writing about games, in response to the questions we have been asked.

We’re against sexism, we support feminist arguments of various kinds. We encourage you to disagree with these arguments, but we are not obliged to disagree with them ourselves, or to publish arguments attacking them at any level of vehemence. We do not have to present anyone else’s argument. RPS is a curated space, privately owned by individuals. It is our own website, which we use to say the things we want to say. That is bias, and we are completely happy to accept that. We are not objective robots, or a corporation trying to be “neutral”, and wouldn’t want to be. Yes, we invite some discussion, but we also get to police that, and decide when enough is enough. We have a huge platform with millions of people reading it. There are many things we just don’t want posted on our site, because this site is not for them to promote themselves. In 2014 people of all kinds have all manner of platforms to work from, they don’t need this one, and we’re certainly not obliged to allow free reign in using it.

This was my favorite part of the article because, to me, it represents the most earnest, honest part of the discussion. This would have been a great statement for the gaming sites to make – 2 weeks ago.

If an RPS or Kotaku or Gamasutra wants to publicly acknowledge that they have an agenda to promote games and personalities based on their politics then how can anyone object to that? It’s their site.

At the same time, however, the gaming media will continue to decline, and make no mistake, it is declining, if the readership continues to lose trust in the objectivity of the site. If a gamer is just interested in finding fun games, they’re going to be disinclined to visit sites that determine their coverage based on their politics rather than any sense of objective merit. That isn't the same as saying they should/need to be "neutral". Write interesting things and people will come.

I read RPS every day. I expect I’ll continue to read RPS every day as long as the stories and content are things I’m interested in. They’re under no obligation to cover things I’m interested in. If they switched their coverage to focusing on handheld games, I’d probably stop reading it just as if they started bombarding me with articles telling me I’m a misogynist because I like Grand Theft Auto. That’s how the free market works and I say good for them.

Make sure you read the whole thing: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/09/08/videogames-are-for-everybody/

 AdeptSister wrote:
I really don't like the "everyone is doing it, why are you picking on me" argument. If gaming wants people to stop calling them misogynistic, we have to better at addressing the issues. While it has gotten much better, there is still a way to go.

I think the actions of a vocal minority (that is tolerated) is more hurtful than generalizations.

 AdeptSister wrote:
I really don't like the "everyone is doing it, why are you picking on me" argument. If gaming wants people to stop calling them misogynistic, we have to better at addressing the issues. While it has gotten much better, there is still a way to go.

I think the actions of a vocal minority (that is tolerated) is more hurtful than generalizations.

 Asherian Command wrote:

This article makes me sad: http://t.co/lHDDIs48R2

 daedalus wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

This article makes me sad: http://t.co/lHDDIs48R2

Ah, the "fighting stereotypes and overcoming adversity" narrative.

I have a question based on that telegraph article. I don't think it's actually been asked in this way yet in the thread: Do people find the idea of someone fething someone for favors (when they operate under the public assumption of lack of a bias) more repugnant than someone paying someone for favors (when they operate under the public assumption of lack of a bias)?

 Asherian Command wrote:

And then we have comments like this.... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxK5GOvCQAAD8Xo.jpg

 Asherian Command wrote:
While the majority of games journalists are attacking gamers O.o

 Asherian Command wrote:
That small minority though of gamers who are actually dicks, are being reported and dealt with on our side.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Also this article...
This article makes me sad: http://t.co/lHDDIs48R2

 Asherian Command wrote:
And then a good article yeah: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/09/09/An-open-letter-to-the-video-gaming-community-from-a-self-confessed-right-wing-bastard?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

So ignore the shoddy, opportunistic posturing from feminists about Rodger’s crimes. It’s the blurring of fantasy and reality in today’s video game-obsessed young men that’s the real enemy. If there’s a cultural milieu that contributed to the creation of Elliot Rodger, it was that of nihilistic video games, not the myth of patriarchal oppression.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
While the majority of games journalists are attacking gamers O.o

I do not think AdeptSister meant anything about game journalists.

 Asherian Command wrote:
That small minority though of gamers who are actually dicks, are being reported and dealt with on our side.

Dealt with? How?

 Asherian Command wrote:
Also this article...
This article makes me sad: http://t.co/lHDDIs48R2

Why? Seems pretty balanced to me.
Give a lot of different point of views.

 Asherian Command wrote:
You read the whole article right? Its still crying out and saying the majority of people are misogynistic.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
You read the whole article right? Its still crying out and saying the majority of people are misogynistic.

No. It does give Quinn more screen time (well, paper time?) than other people, but it does give some Gamergates people the occasion to express themselves. The article include Quinn herself saying some people involved in Gamergates are not misogynists. What else would you have wanted? That they only gave your side of the argument the occasion to speak out?
(Also, in case you missed it, I added something tasty in my previous message about Milo Yiannopoulos, and how video games turns people into killer .

 Asherian Command wrote:
I didn't say it was a great article. I said it was a good article.

Great and good are two different terms.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
I didn't say it was a great article. I said it was a good article.

Great and good are two different terms.

Good for you. I would personally take the guy that says video games make people misogynists rather than the guy which says it makes people heartless killers, but fair enough!

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Good for you. I would personally take the guy that says video games make people misogynists rather than the guy which says it makes people heartless killers, but fair enough!

 daedalus wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Good for you. I would personally take the guy that says video games make people misogynists rather than the guy which says it makes people heartless killers, but fair enough!

Why take either?

Today I sat down with the people behind the Fine Young Capitalists to talk about what they stand for, their recent project to get games created by women into the market place, and their involvement with controversial figure, Zoe Quinn.

Their most recent project has been a contest in which women submitted ideas for games. The winner, who is being voted on right now from five possible candidates, will have their game made and released to the public.

APGNation: Firstly, thank you for taking the time to answer our questions today. Our staff and readers really appreciate it. To begin, why don’t you tell our readers at home who may not be familiar with your organization what you do and what inspired everyone involved to start the project in the first place?

The Fine Young Capitalists: The Fine Young Capitalists’ mission is to create media using underrepresented labor, for unexplored demographics to fund non-profit organizations. Thereby “Creating the means for the production.” In simpler terms, we are a loose group of artists and entrepreneurs who work with minorities to help them make video games, graphic novels, and videos. Our current project is to get women to design video games. In March, we did an open call where any woman could come up with an idea for a video game. We took the top 5 best ideas and had them work with concept artists to design their game. Those ideas are online and the internet is voting on the best one. If there is enough interest in the form of pre-orders through crowdfunding, we’ll work with the winning women to create her game, giving her a percentage of the profits with the rest going to charity. The majority of the woman who applied did not have the necessary skills or connections to make their game.

Our groups were inspired because we felt that many interesting stories weren’t being told. This was a combination of lack of interest from the business community and the financial difficulties of hiring experienced labor when starting out. We were also highly suspicious of projects that only focus on education. Running a two-week workshop on how to design a game is great for fun, but it takes years to learn the skills necessary to make a real game and months to develop a project for market. We really wanted to show the world a finished product that people would buy, as a way to inspire businesses to hire more women.

We also wanted the backers to understand that they were giving money because they thought the project would succeed. As such TFYC is set up so anyone that backs the project gets part of the profits from the game to give to charity. This was supposed to create the idea in the person’s mind that he was investing in a woman. As a radical feminist group it’s important for people to see women as creators of ideas that are financially viable. By creating this perception, it helps us to break down the patriarchy.

You can back us at https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/the-fine-young-capitalists–2

APGNation: Zoe Quinn was connected to the Fine Young Capitalists for a time. What role did she play in the grand scheme of things?

TFYC: We did not expect this question, but Zoe Quinn has probably been the largest problem to this production even before it existed.

On Feb 28th, Zoe Quinn found out about the production through one of her followers, @ObiCynKenobi. Zoe Quinn started “Zoe Then Proceeds To Bribe Us“asking questions about the production that we answered. She asked about why we thought women should work for free. We explained that the women got 8% of the profits from the game (Which in television is what a producer would take) as well getting all the art that was created for their pitch for free. Zoe also asked about our Trans policy, which is here (http://www.thefineyoungcapitalists.com/TransgenderPolicy). She had a specific problem with us policing people transition points. We explained that the reason for this policy was to prevent men lying about their identity (You have to identify as a woman publicly before the start of the contest) to gain access and to make it more accessible to people without identification.

Zoe Quinn then began a twitter discussion, which can be seen here. But the major points is she DDoS’d our site, she called us exploitative, and her PR manager Maya Felix Kramer posted my Facebook information which Zoe replied to alerting her followers. Due to this, I received a death threat. My name, Matthew Rappard, does not appear on the current site or the previous site for TFYC. I would have preferred to be a silent partner. This twitter retweeting went on for almost 24 hours most of them calling us transphobic and exploitative.

TFYC is what we like to refer as a high-risk production. We were aware that there might be some blowback. We did not expect his level of blowback, specifically the claim of being transphobic. One business partner, not wanting the rest of his work to be referred to as transphobic, left the project. He was planning to contribute $10,000 dollars. This cost was covered by me.

We immediately delayed launching the site for a week while we addressed these issues making sure or transgender policy was correct (It was checked by another human rights lawyer) and we went over our monetary policies. They were all deemed fine.

After the launch, it became extremely difficult to engage with an audience, if you searched for our name, especially on twitter then you’d get a long“Kotaku’s Jason Schreier contacted us after our Indiegogo page got hacked on August 25“ series of comment about how exploitative we were. Because of the number of tweets and retweets these search results bled into google. More over the original twitter storm spread into many communities. We had difficulties engaging with video game design communities, inevitably being called scam artists and often our threads were closed without specific reasoning as to why.

We approached a journalist and got a response for Chloi Rad at Indiestatik who liked the project and did an interview. She went to GDC, and we assumed she would publish the article. We contacted her at GDC when we were having more twitter problems with another user, asking when she was going to publish the article. She said she would talk to Zoe Quinn while she was at GDC. Chloi Rad did not get back us for about a week. We were doing an AMA on reddit, which included drawings and we did a drawing of Chloi as a means of getting her attention. Chloi asked us to immediately remove her name/picture from the AMA and explained that Zoe had told her that the project was highly exploitative and that we were transphobic. She made it clear she didn’t want to be associated with us. All the issues Zoe had with the project were addressed in the interview. Chloi has never published the article.

An article is very important because it allows us to engage with social networks like Reddit (I.E. link to the article instead of our page) and the Chloi sentiment was repeated when Zoe was brought into the picture with other journalists. We contacted Zoe a total of 5 times before the start of the crowdfunding, 2 by phone and 2 by email, and one through Chloi. Before the crowdfunding portion started, we also sent Emails to Chloi and Maya Felix Kramer explaining we would not engage in crowd funding if they deemed the project exploitative, nether responded. One of Zoe’s email explained that we would hire her as a consultant on a project, it was not returned.

We were extremely worried about Zoe because of her experience in a GameJam, which she ended. We were seriously worried that a similar thing could happen to us.

Once we launched the project there was a thread about the Wizardchan Raid on reddit. We had done research on Zoe, and we were aware that Wizardchan had not raided her, and assumed it was common knowledge and posted to the thread what happened to us, expecting 10 upvotes. We also indicated that Rebel Jam, the Gamejam that Zoe had started after she ended the previous one, had no start date, or location, but was still taking donations going directly into her bank account.

That reddit thread was picked up by the Internet Aristocrat, and published online in one of his videos. Which is where the information became public and known by the internet community. We assumed at this time Zoe just didn’t understand the project and was covering.

Kotaku’s Jason Schreier contacted us after our Indiegogo page got hacked on Aug 25. At the time, we assumed Zoe had simply not understood the terms of our website, and asked to do an article on the facts of the issues explaining Zoe was confused and did not understand them. We wanted to set the record straight on what happened. That article was never published.

On the Aug 27, Zoe contacted us via email asking why we said she doxxed us. We explained that she had retweeted Maya’s doxxing information. Zoe explained that Maya was not associated with her (A point which goes against Maya’s webpage and the twitter conversation) and attempted to manipulate the situation, and blame it on Maya.

At the time, we felt that since PAX was such an important part of Zoe’s work life that we should make a statement on the situation. We asked for a phone call. Zoe wanted us to deny that she had doxxed us, we said we wouldn’t lie but would make a statement. Zoe then proceeded to bribe us by saying that she would speak about us at PAX if we made the statement. We didn’t take her up on the offer but said we’d make a statement which she’d approve. We also discussed helping with RebelJam/ Another GameJam, because we so much difficulty making contacts in the indie video game industry. She agreed to help us.

Over the course of the next day we worked with Zoe to create a document known as the Peace Treaty. Zoe was supposed to have signed it but at the last minute decided not to. We expected her to take some responsibility but on her Tumblr she simply said that she didn’t Doxx us, and that it was just because she got passionate.

On September 2 we contacted an interactive/television producer that worked on video games that was interested in helping Zoe with Rebel Jam and to provide funding for the project. Zoe did not respond to 3 emails and 1 text asking if she’d like to have a meeting with the producer. We felt extremely used at this point.

We have taken down the PeaceTalk document instead directing people to the statement.

We feel Zoe is extremely suspect as she has lied to us on every occasion, she has deliberately misrepresented information as well as openly bribed us to change our story. We strongly suggest people should be very careful when dealing with her.

APGNation: On the topic of the threats received by people like Zoe Quinn, what do you think makes some people believe that such threats are a legitimate form of protest or speech? What do you feel is the best way to work towards eliminating behavior such as this?

TFYC: Threat aren’t protected speech, period. And I feel they cloud the issue. As I’ve written in great length there are very good reasons to be critical of Zoe Quinn’s work. Honest criticism can not be expressed and explored fully when she’s receiving threats of violence.

I feel the best way to end such behavior would be to have an honest and open discussion in the press so that people understand the issues, and don’t just jump to conclusions. I find even on Internet discussions if you link to an article, that can deflate an angry argument. I feel that honestly, this isn’t happening. Not for reviews, not for stories, not for anything. Penny Arcade once made a statement that /r/games is like a portal into seeing what gaming news will be in 4 hours. Reddit is not a place for people to get stories, and writing a story in 4 hours based on unsubstantiated information isn’t real journalism.

I also feel people should really stop taunting their trolls, at the time of writing at least ⅓ of the top 20 post on Zoe’s twitter feed were taunts at 4chan and other internet trolls. It’s impossible to say this without sounding like you’re blaming the victim. But it’s difficult to consider her blameless when you pretend that saving a public IRC chat is hacking a site, or that people who have no rank control a group. I have never been able to successfully get 4chan to do anything. I’d be shocked if anyone else could with a degree of certainty. They came to us with a donation, the came to us with a character, we just said yes, we asked for nothing. Pretending that 4chan is one person, or that their members share a common opinion on any topic is just plain silly.

APGNation: What are your feelings on Depression Quest?

TFYC: I feel that it is a game which some people feel a deep connection with. I do not, in the same way I did not like Dear Esther, or the newest Madden. It just wasn’t my type of game the last time I played it.
That being said it is nether a technological marvel or a good indication of the average of design skills of a woman. Since the game is browser-based arguably Steam is a more cumbersome way to interact with it. And since Steam is taking a percentage of any donations received through it’s E-Store, it would have lower transaction costs in the browser.
It is a strange game to have made it through Greenlight. But there are worst games that have made it through and better ones that have not.

APGNation: One of your stated goals is to get more women into various aspects of the gaming community. What advice do you have for women who want to develop their own games or write about games, but may be intimidated by certain aspects of the culture? Also, for gamers in general, what advice would you have for people who want to help put a better face forward for the community?

TFYC: The first point to understand is that woman in no way lack the skill, or physical ability to write code, or develop games. Per Capita women are more likely to be on Dean’s List in computer science than men, a woman invented the first computer programming language, and they show no less aptitude in problem solving or art. We assume most of the lack of interest comes from socialization and not a lack of desire or skill.

We find that men really just need to make people aware that they support women. One of the nicest things about TFYC is that it was all about thewomen in gaming Truth In Gaming: An Interview with The Fine Young Capitalists games, and we’d take the money from anyone. People who didn’t like feminism for some reason weren’t punished if they joined and could actively support women. We find even just saying hello to a new member of a gaming group, regardless of gender, makes them feel more welcome. These small steps help to make groups more inclusive and are just general courtesies.

We find that while the informal culture for video games can be difficult at times, the formal culture is very supportive. In Toronto groups like Hackernest will give our free passes to their events to women, and they are often giving preferential treatment at events. We suggest woman exploit these systems to make as many contacts as possible so they can find the right person to work with. We then suggest that they focus on presenting their idea over to themselves. Women tend to be viewed/judged on who they are and not what they can do. Because so much of computer science is through pseudonyms this can negatively affect women’s ability to succeed if they focus only on themselves. By focusing on ideas that are presented well, your gender can be removed from the equation

APGNation: Do you think that the depiction of women in games needs to change, and, if so, how? Also, do any of you have a favorite female video game character that you feel is particularly well executed?

TFYC: We feel that additional women working in the industry will create new games, which will allow for new characters. Video games actually have a rich tradition of strong female characters, especially in JRPGs. Even Lara Croft in the new Tomb Raider is executed quite well, and much better than she was before. We feel that games like Grand Theft Auto with it’s particular brand of humor overshadows the good work that is done. We don’t feel like people should stop making Grand Theft Auto but we do feel that women should be able to design more female orientated games with their own characters that they may feel are empowered, but might not resonate with men. We also feel that woman should add their own characters to the existing genres to make it more inclusive.

APGNation: There have been many accusations of misogyny leveled against the gaming community as of late. How much truth do you think there is to those claims?

TFYC: I can reference Bell Hook here.

Emotional neglect lays the groundwork for the emotional numbing “This Corruption Is Always A Real Concern“that helps boys feel better about being cut off. Eruptions of rage in boys are most often deemed normal, explained by the age-old justification for adolescent patriarchal misbehavior, “Boys will be boys.” Patriarchy both creates the rage in boys and then contains it for later use, making it a resource to exploit later on as boys, become men. – The Will to Change: Men, Masculinity and Love

With all the focus on female characters and female representation, the media has completely ignored male representation in gaming and its audience. In reality the average male gamer is over 30 now, many have daughters, wives or girlfriends. I don’t think people that lead these normal lives are misogynists. But I think a vocal minority feel they are not being represented and don’t have words to explain their problems. This confusion is expressed mostly as anger at everything. At game journalists, at women in the industry, at everyone.

I really feel more discussion of representation that address both genders would lower some of this anger. It would not completely remove it, but could help in the long run.

APGNation: On the other side of things, many gamers are speaking out about gaming news sites doing “feminist” news pieces. Do you think there is any legitimate concern here?

TFYC: I don’t feel that the issue has been with feminist pieces, I feel the issue was with Clickbait pieces. Articles that were poorly researched and meant to cause anger in the reader. I feel that there is very little real discussion of feminism in games. Simply a lot of finger pointing aimed at the male demographic. I feel that if a publication was to do a longer column that explores gender in depth, and provide a balanced viewpoint, it would be very well received by both genders, as our videos have. But I also feel that Clickbait probably generates the same revenue with much less effort.

APGNation: 4Chan recently donated quite a bit of money to your campaign over at Indiegogo. Was it surprising to get so much support from them, and what was the response from your team to the donation at the time?

TFYC: 4chan was swept rather unfairly into the Zoe Quinn thing. Their moderators actually engaged in a similar purging of information as many other sites had, but got relaxed faster than reddit did. 4chan is a collection of users with different drives and emotions. They are often used as a tool to spread information anonymously by users that don’t frequent the page.

Because so much information was being posted by Zoe Quinn on 4chan our name was mentioned due to the reddit leak. As such we started to receive donations from 4chan. For two days in a row they were the top donator to TFYC and I decided to Tweet out a thanks before going to bed. The Tweet was retweeted hundreds of times. When I awoke, I had received a letter to media@thefineyoungcapitalists.com, explaining that 4chan shouldn’t donate to women’s projects. I wrote a response on twitter saying that /v/’s love of games transcended gender barriers and that they were welcome. This resonated with /v/ and they asked if they could get a referral link and pool their money to reach the most expensive perk, which was to be a Logo in the game. We said yes and over the next couple weeks /v/ managed to raise over $22,000 through their referral link. This easily awarded them with their Logo which will appear before the front of the game. It’s important to understand that 4chan corporate isn’t affiliated with the project, so the community at /v/ took the time to design their own logo, which we are still voting on.

I was surprised that 4chan was so interested in the project. To this day we receive more referral traffic from 4chan than any other page. We feel this project resonated with /v/ because it’s so game focused and we treat them with respect. When /v/ designed Vivian James and asked if she could be placed into the game, we said yes because we liked the character. Because 4chan raised so much money we wanted to reward them. So we asked them what they’d like our next video to be about. They said female developers and as such we’ve covered three female developers and will probably cover at least 2 more by the end of the contest.

APGNation: The integrity of gaming journalism has come under fire recently. Is this a real concern, or something thrown out to distract people from other issues?

TFYC: Like movies, video games spend tens of millions of dollars on marketing. To pretend that this money doesn’t affect what is covered and by who is ludicrous. This corruption is always a real concern, and gaining the trust back of the audience is nearly impossible.

I do feel many of the policies being adopted by the Escapist, and other magazines in regard to Kickstarter and Patreon are actually good starting points to lowering the fears that people had. That being said, I feel most journalists are just trying to tell good stories and get paid properly. I feel that the majority of “corruption” is in reality “confusion” between parties.

Giant Bomb was created not out of the direct action of a publisher, but confusion internally at GameSpot, and certain producers overstepping their bounds to layoff reviewers. The lesson there was that people too often jump to the conclusion before coming to facts. However, many of the scandals that having been coming out in the last couple weeks do need to be addressed fairly. And steps should be taken so they don’t happen in the future.

APGNation: Do you think that gaming news sites will change if gamers begin to boycott those they feel are not ethical or reliable?

TFYC: I feel any site that can not maintain an audience is doomed to fail.

APGNation: What does the future hold for the Fine Young Capitalists? Do you have any projects down the pipeline besides those already in the works?

TFYC: We are still working on SNless which is a graphic novel project. Based around getting more people who self-identify as Black into the science fiction. Anyone that self-identifies as Black can create a character for the world. We’ll take the top 20 and work with the creators to design the character. The Internet will choose the top 5 characters and we’ll work with the author to create a graphic novel with the character. I like the idea, but it’s difficult to determine if it will be a succeed or not, at the moment.

APGNation: Of the projects you’ve worked on in the past, which has been your favorite?

TFYC: I’m still a money guy at heart. Unfortunately, my favorite projects are the ones where I work the least and get paid the most. I am not getting paid for TFYC, but my favorite project was one where I did almost nothing, got paid, and used the money to create a graphic novel with a friend.

APGNation: Thank you for your time, before we go though, do you have any parting words you’d like to share with our readers?

TFYC: The point of TFYC was to show that woman had good ideas and that men support them. People often forget the second part. To every guy out there that supported us, thank for showing that so many men actually care about women’s issues. For the women that are just hearing about the contest, remember that we want you making games just as much you do.

So there you have it. Another voice in the ongoing dialogue in the gaming community on gender, game journalism, and what we gamers can do to make our hobby more accessible to a wider audience. If you would like to know more about the Fine Young Capitalists and their recent contest to produce a game based on ideas pitched exclusively by women, you can visit them at their website here.

As always, we at APGNation strive to bring our readers the finest in gaming news and content, just like this interview. So if you want to see more in the future, make sure to follow us on Twitter @APGNation so you’ll always be up to date and informed! Support us by sharing on social media, any article you read and liked! If you’re a gamer and want to make a difference, then come and write for us! Send an E-Mail to info@APGNation.com and you could join our team!

S/N

We’ve reached out to Miss Quinn via Twitter for an interview but, as of press, we have not heard back from her.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Slarg232 wrote:
The problem with games like Depression Quest is that they don't actually raise awareness, especially when built like Depression Quest; People whom aren't aware aren't going to play it, people whom are don't need the messege, and no one is going to slog through text.

Basically.

I mean you can't just tack on a story to a depressive situation. You need to first tell a story. And it is up to the person to find out through the emotions of the character, through their actions, through their words, to figure out what depression is like.

Using vivid imagery, using things that happen. I think the biggest argument I have against the game is that it feels disconnected.

 Asherian Command wrote:
I judge the article for its own merits not for its past bits.

Sometimes, we'll line up. Your enemies will be my enemies. I can't think of anything more awful than a humourless, dishonest, disreputable clique of single-issue campaigners turning indie games into boring social justice vehicles. Other times, you may want to give me a slap. Sometimes we may be in near-total agreement.

 Slarg232 wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Slarg232 wrote:
The problem with games like Depression Quest is that they don't actually raise awareness, especially when built like Depression Quest; People whom aren't aware aren't going to play it, people whom are don't need the messege, and no one is going to slog through text.

Basically.

I mean you can't just tack on a story to a depressive situation. You need to first tell a story. And it is up to the person to find out through the emotions of the character, through their actions, through their words, to figure out what depression is like.

Using vivid imagery, using things that happen. I think the biggest argument I have against the game is that it feels disconnected.

Not sure I agree; a good type of game for getting Depression across would be to have a bright and colorful world, with the main character falling down a giant pit. At the bottom, there is no color, no sound, no nothing. As you start to climb up, colors and sounds start to come back.... until a platform suddenly falls out from under your feet and you go crashing back down to the bottom, only to start climbing back up again. Have that happen enough times to seriously annoy the player, but not enough to where it becomes unplayable. When they finally get to the top, all the color and sound is restored and let the message show; "What you just experianced was a battle with depression."

Those who ragequit because they kept getting dropped down to the bottom lost that battle. As someone who fought depression in my High School years, I can say (While not for everyone) that any tiny thing can send you hurtling back into it, even as your struggling to get over depression.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I have to say this is a rather interesting experience for me. I've never been generalized before. I think of myself as an equlitist (one who wants quality for everyone) and this is obviously searching for something to be mad about to make some money. There is not more misogyny in games than there is anywhere else.

True, but is that the gamers fault? Or the culture's fault? Or the designers fault? I mean we have been seeing less and less of it over the years.

by the way Equalitists don't exist, Egalitarianism I think is what you are going for.


The generalization is hurting the community. Pretty bad.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I have to say this is a rather interesting experience for me. I've never been generalized before. I think of myself as an equlitist (one who wants quality for everyone) and this is obviously searching for something to be mad about to make some money. There is not more misogyny in games than there is anywhere else.

True, but is that the gamers fault? Or the culture's fault? Or the designers fault? I mean we have been seeing less and less of it over the years.

by the way Equalitists don't exist, Egalitarianism I think is what you are going for.


The generalization is hurting the community. Pretty bad.

It is not, it is society's fault. But it is changing. The gaming community did use to be mostly white men, but not any more. It is getting much more diverse. And so s\are the games. The gamers of today are the designers of tomorrow. And if they are diverse, the games will be.

Egalitarianism may be waht I am looking for, I just made up equalist of the top of my head (femanist, one who fights of women's rights, go from there ). Perhaps 'Omnist' would work better, although omnism is a DW religion, so that might be confusing.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I have to say this is a rather interesting experience for me. I've never been generalized before. I think of myself as an equlitist (one who wants quality for everyone) and this is obviously searching for something to be mad about to make some money. There is not more misogyny in games than there is anywhere else.

True, but is that the gamers fault? Or the culture's fault? Or the designers fault? I mean we have been seeing less and less of it over the years.

by the way Equalitists don't exist, Egalitarianism I think is what you are going for.


The generalization is hurting the community. Pretty bad.

It is not, it is society's fault. But it is changing. The gaming community did use to be mostly white men, but not any more. It is getting much more diverse. And so s\are the games. The gamers of today are the designers of tomorrow. And if they are diverse, the games will be.

Egalitarianism may be waht I am looking for, I just made up equalist of the top of my head (femanist, one who fights of women's rights, go from there ). Perhaps 'Omnist' would work better, although omnism is a DW religion, so that might be confusing.

I think the major problem in getting into game design is how depressive it is. I mean the entire game design scene is extremely hard to break into.

Its pretty damn hard. We have to study multiple subjects. How many jobs require you to have a mastery of mathematics, animation, art, programming, learning languages, critical thinking, and creative expression all in one box?

Very few do. I can say this as a student of game design that it is a lot harder to get your feet on the ground in the industry than any other.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I have to say this is a rather interesting experience for me. I've never been generalized before. I think of myself as an equlitist (one who wants quality for everyone) and this is obviously searching for something to be mad about to make some money. There is not more misogyny in games than there is anywhere else.

True, but is that the gamers fault? Or the culture's fault? Or the designers fault? I mean we have been seeing less and less of it over the years.

by the way Equalitists don't exist, Egalitarianism I think is what you are going for.


The generalization is hurting the community. Pretty bad.

It is not, it is society's fault. But it is changing. The gaming community did use to be mostly white men, but not any more. It is getting much more diverse. And so s\are the games. The gamers of today are the designers of tomorrow. And if they are diverse, the games will be.

Egalitarianism may be waht I am looking for, I just made up equalist of the top of my head (femanist, one who fights of women's rights, go from there ). Perhaps 'Omnist' would work better, although omnism is a DW religion, so that might be confusing.

I think the major problem in getting into game design is how depressive it is. I mean the entire game design scene is extremely hard to break into.

Its pretty damn hard. We have to study multiple subjects. How many jobs require you to have a mastery of mathematics, animation, art, programming, learning languages, critical thinking, and creative expression all in one box?

Very few do. I can say this as a student of game design that it is a lot harder to get your feet on the ground in the industry than any other.

It does seem that way from what I have looked at. I'm going to college for a CS degree (and would love to get into the industry), but it seems that I should keep my day job, as it were.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Good for you. I would personally take the guy that says video games make people misogynists rather than the guy which says it makes people heartless killers, but fair enough!

Why take either?

I don't. I just posted the article, thought it was an interesting read. I thought of it as more of a step forward than a step backward.

Also:

http://apgnation.com/archives/2014/09/09/6977/truth-gaming-interview-fine-young-capitalists

Today I sat down with the people behind the Fine Young Capitalists to talk about what they stand for, their recent project to get games created by women into the market place, and their involvement with controversial figure, Zoe Quinn.

.

for those confused about the issue.

I will leave this here

]

This will hopefully help those who are new to the argument understand it.

 AdeptSister wrote:
Sorry. I was replying to that one post in the thread. I know that the major issue discussed here was corruption, but the casual dismissal of misogyny in gaming culture was irritating.