Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

UPDATE

We already had a thread on this. You're late

You mean we tried to have a thread of this. Unfortunately these sorts of things tend to get drowned out Let's not call out others by name please--AgeOfEgos

Anyway, update:

It's a good thing we haven't.....oh wait!

So a thread gets locked in one forum just to be reborn in another. Truly miracles do exist!

 Ahtman wrote:
So a thread gets locked in one forum just to be reborn in another. Truly miracles do exist!

Woah! This is just like that time Jesus' thread got deleted and re-posted three days later! They had internet forums back then, right? My Bible trivia is rusty.

I dont know what the relevance of the videos in the OP are to the wider issue, it looks to me to be a mudslinging between individuals in a broken relationship played against a backdrop of gaming journalism.

For a better look at biased gaming journalism take a good look at the Angry Joe Show. Angry Joe tells it like it is with regards to developer policy, dishonest reviews and DLC 'whoring' as he likes to describe it.
Angry Joe is a one stop show for an honest review, as he is a reviewer you might not agree with all his opinions, I dont. But I believe he gives an honest go, looks at the games he reviews properly and isn't in the pockets of any game developer studio or their corporate masters.

With respect to Mechanical Crow please ignore the fake controversy of the OP, its vapour and doesn't address the issues gamers have with the low moral quality of gaming journalism.

The Zoey thing isn't a 'fake controversy', and it and of itself it is not a big controversy. What it is though is a lens, and it is the lens we're using today to see through to what games journalism is.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The Zoey thing isn't a 'fake controversy', and it and of itself it is not a big controversy. What it is though is a lens, and it is the lens we're using today to see through to what games journalism is.

90% of the smacktalk on the videos consisted of personal attacks, who had sex with who, and who lied to who, and who is a 'douche', to and fro ad nauseam and contributed remarkably little to gaming journalism for a topic supposedly all about gaming journalism.
It doesnt matter about who slept with which co-worker, they should keep it to themselves, what matters are the industry matters, and fair balanced reportage.

The real issues of gaming journalism are funded reviews that give overly positive outlooks on sporoned games by supposedly impartial gaming reviewers and critics, and the silence regarding unethical policy in games production and distribution.
Both of these can be addressed and neatly bypassed by taking the opinions of the independent games journalists both online and in the press who are not under financial support from the games industry.

Independents are there to be found and will provide all the news you could want from multiple opinions. The more mobile also visit the trade shows and have enough clout to get interviews. An example of one independent was given, there are others.
I couldnt give a gak about the 'Zoey thing' and can we well clued up with regards to gaming industry news without having to waste any time on a bitchy soap opera hijacking it.

This whole 'issue' arises because these reviewers think that somehow their private lives have become important. It's frankly self centred and delusional. If they want to discuss it or even blog it go ahead, if someone wanted to read their dirty underwear story so be it, but not under a claim that its gaming news.

tl;dr:

Zoe Quinn did NOT sleep around with a few guys to get good reviews for her game. That's a lie.

Zoe Quinn is a terrible person. She purposefully faked a "raid" on her by an entire forum to then victimize herself and instrumentalize feminism in order to get publicity. Worst of all, she, the developer of the game "Depression Quest", a game that is supposed to give the player an idea of what a depression feels like, purposefully misled people by faking the "raid" of a messageboard that is mainly entitled to lonely men with emotional deficits. This display of lacking empathy is disgusting when at the same time, she claims to be oh-so-empathic with her game.

She slept with 1+ other guys despite being married, which makes her a you-totally-know-the-word-that-would-be-fitting-for-a-person-who-purposefully-sleeps-with-many-people-despite-being-in-a-relationship.

Depression Quest is a terrible game with justified bad ratings.

Nepotism has always been the problem of gaming "journalism", so I don't see why people are so upset about it now. The Zoe Quinn case isn't showing how bad gaming journalism is, it's about the giant impact of one invidiual playing the sexism card seems to have. I am utterly disgusted by:

a) the ridiculous actions taken by people to "attack" her. I am ashamed as a human being for people doing those things to her.

b) Zoe Quinn for faking sexist attacks and instrumentalizing feminism.

She doesn't deserve the things done to her, but she willingly provoked all of this to happen.

 Sigvatr wrote:
tl;dr:

Zoe Quinn did NOT sleep around with a few guys to get good reviews for her game. That's a lie.

Zoe Quinn is a terrible person. She purposefully faked a "raid" on her by an entire forum to then victimize herself and instrumentalize feminism in order to get publicity. Worst of all, she, the developer of the game "Depression Quest", a game that is supposed to give the player an idea of what a depression feels like, purposefully misled people by faking the "raid" of a messageboard that is mainly entitled to lonely men with emotional deficits. This display of lacking empathy is disgusting when at the same time, she claims to be oh-so-empathic with her game.

She slept with 1+ other guys despite being married, which makes her a you-totally-know-the-word-that-would-be-fitting-for-a-person-who-purposefully-sleeps-with-many-people-despite-being-in-a-relationship.

Depression Quest is a terrible game with justified bad ratings.

Nepotism has always been the problem of gaming "journalism", so I don't see why people are so upset about it now. The Zoe Quinn case isn't showing how bad gaming journalism is, it's about the giant impact of one invidiual playing the sexism card seems to have. I am utterly disgusted by:

a) the ridiculous actions taken by people to "attack" her. I am ashamed as a human being for people doing those things to her.

b) Zoe Quinn for faking sexist attacks and instrumentalizing feminism.

She doesn't deserve the things done to her, but she willingly provoked all of this to happen.

And to think you could learn all there was to learn about actual gaming news, whats coming out and when, what is in development and which software is worth buying; without needing to know a single jot of info about this Zoe character or her detrators.
It's a soap opera, waved in our faces, not gaming journalism.
It's fifteen minutes are up, the games journalism clique should tell us what is being released on PC/XBox/PS4/Wii etc next month and give us an honest unsponsored review of it..

 Orlanth wrote:
...the games journalism clique should tell us what is being released on PC/XBox/PS4/Wii etc next month and give us an honest unsponsored review of it..

Well they won't, because gaming journalism isn't.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
...the games journalism clique should tell us what is being released on PC/XBox/PS4/Wii etc next month and give us an honest unsponsored review of it..

Well they won't, because gaming journalism isn't.

They seem more interested in pushing agendas, like that Anita "I don't play video games" Snarkeesian tumblr insanity.





Automatically Appended Next Post:
The massive amounts of censorship is the most damning of evidence.

and here is a live stream:

 Orlanth wrote:
I dont know what the relevance of the videos in the OP are to the wider issue, it looks to me to be a mudslinging between individuals in a broken relationship played against a backdrop of gaming journalism.

For a better look at biased gaming journalism take a good look at the Angry Joe Show. Angry Joe tells it like it is with regards to developer policy, dishonest reviews and DLC 'whoring' as he likes to describe it.
Angry Joe is a one stop show for an honest review, as he is a reviewer you might not agree with all his opinions, I dont. But I believe he gives an honest go, looks at the games he reviews properly and isn't in the pockets of any game developer studio or their corporate masters.

With respect to Mechanical Crow please ignore the fake controversy of the OP, its vapour and doesn't address the issues gamers have with the low moral quality of gaming journalism.

Joe has had issues with video game journalism in the past as well.

I think that this casts as negative a light onto the indie game scene as it does onto video game journalism. We see time and time again that independent game developers are egotistical donkey caves who can't handle any criticism of their product. Things like Earth year 2066 show us what a pack of prima doñas these developers can be. This Zoe Quinn person is just using what's between her legs to suppress opinions against her own, just like some developers in steam use their steam community and copywriter claims to suppress negative reviews.

I consider game journalism to be no different than any other form of journalism. However I am pretty sick of game journalists remind what a terrible person I am for being white, male, middle class and cis. But that's not unique to game journalism.

Wow what a massive ramble, anyway, what I'm saying is that Zoe Quinn is no different it seems to the devs of earth year 2066 or air control

Edited by AgeOfEgos---even if you are not directing such language to the person in question---let's refrain from using that--thanks.

Ryan


Zoe is a side note, the straw the broke the camels back.

The censorship, the conflicts of interest and unethical behaviour and insane double standards is what the issue is, not feminism, she is just a gakky human being and they are trying to make it about her and not the corrupt bs and incestuous relationships and nepotism.

The evidence is so heavily against the "journalists" that they will use any scapegoat, and it doesn't take much to get feminists to tune out facts and go for blood, even though Zoe admitted to rape which is normally their number 1 hate. Just goes to show its only sexist when men do it.

All of this just shows the media manipulation, the failings of modern feminism (or misandry as it seems) and the wilful ignorance and insanity of the social justice warriors.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:
...the games journalism clique should tell us what is being released on PC/XBox/PS4/Wii etc next month and give us an honest unsponsored review of it..

Well they won't, because gaming journalism isn't.

I see this, but in reality what you are witnessing is a just a clique of dishonest reviewers and fake journalists in the pocket of developers.

a lot of people are wising up to that and going to indie reviewers, people like Angry Joe. The games industry has tried to screen off the indies but word is spreading and many indies have a rep and savvy gamers will not trust a review unless it is OKayed by their preferred genre indies. Savvier developers and those not in with the shenanigans are giving indie reviewers more interview time. Two years ago Agngry Joe was stonewalled at the shows, now he gets one on one interview time with top developers. This is because gamers are sick of the BS and if they cant trust the gaming journalists they go to the gaming journalists, because in the internet age there will always be someone out there who wont play the corporate agenda and wont shut up about not playing the corporate agenda.

Gaming journalism always is, because we can switch who we listen to. This is why this whole issue is just noise. Savvy gamers don't care how much mudslinging there is between the 'gaming journalists' in the pay of the corporations, because they are no longer gaming journalists, they are as in-house and soiled of reputation as White Dwarf. People who know gaming go elsewhere for actual gaming info news and this Zoey and the whiners making the videos simply to do not matter, and havent done so for a long time.

 Mechanical Crow wrote:
the failings of modern feminism (or misandry as it seems) and the wilful ignorance and insanity of the social justice warriors.

You're rushing ahead here. Feminism has not been involved until Zoe Quinn instrumentalized it. Zoe Quinn did not get the hate for being a woman - she caused all of it by faking a "raid" on her and false claimed having been harassed. She then went straight to the town square, jumped on an orange box and shouted "MISOGNY! MISOGNY!". That's the disgusting part of the entire story. News outlets immediately jumped on the misogny bandwagon because it's a story that sells well.

That's the second sad part: so many big gaming journalism sites reacted in an extremely sexist way - positive sexism. They immediately went full-protective mode and victimized Zoe Quinn just because she's a woman. That's sexism as well. It's what she wanted but it's still highly sexist. Only at this point did her gender start to play a role.

Zoe Quinn is NOT a feminist and she, in no way, represents modern feminism. She represents a sad woman who sleeps with guys in order to get media coverup and who willingly sacrifices the credibility of other fellow female developers on the altar of publicity by playing the sexism-card. That's not feminism, that's sexism.

Thats why I usually listen to multiple sources, and research it myself.

It is common in reviewers to do certain things because they are paid to do some stuff. I mean where else do they get their money from?

 Asherian Command wrote:


It is common in reviewers to do certain things because they are paid to do some stuff. I mean where else do they get their money from?

Yarrrrrrr. EA bribing Escapist for their DA2 review comes to my mind.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:


It is common in reviewers to do certain things because they are paid to do some stuff. I mean where else do they get their money from?

Yarrrrrrr. EA bribing Escapist for their DA2 review comes to my mind.

You forgot about Yahtzee who ignored that and just called the game crappy.

 Asherian Command wrote:

You forgot about Yahtzee who ignored that and just called the game crappy.

Memory might have failed me...but I was sure that it was The Escapist that gave DA2 a 10/10 with a review that was full of mistakes and features that were announced but not implemented in the game. Was it another site?

No I believe that was the Escapist (but I think they do a 5 point scale). Their words in fact were;

Bottom Line: A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

Lets all take a moment and laugh at that Then watch the video and laugh some more. "They improved literally every game mechanic." Hahahahahaha.

I don't think Yahtzee or Jim Sterling for that matter are Escapist employees. They just contracted to exclusively release their content on the Escapist website. I always figured the Escapist will publish anything if it'll get them money. They don't care what it is

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

You forgot about Yahtzee who ignored that and just called the game crappy.

Memory might have failed me...but I was sure that it was The Escapist that gave DA2 a 10/10 with a review that was full of mistakes and features that were announced but not implemented in the game. Was it another site?

They gave it 5/5. but Yahtzee punched it in the nads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:
No I believe that was the Escapist (but I think they do a 5 point scale). Their words in fact were;

Bottom Line: A pinnacle of role-playing games with well-designed mechanics and excellent story-telling, Dragon Age II is what videogames are meant to be.

Lets all take a moment and laugh at that Then watch the video and laugh some more. "They improved literally every game mechanic." Hahahahahaha.

I don't think Yahtzee or Jim Sterling for that matter are Escapist employees. They just contracted to exclusively release their content on the Escapist website. I always figured the Escapist will publish anything if it'll get them money. They don't care what it is

i wonder if the entire review was just meant to be sarcastic?

I would think they'd cope to it if it was sarcasm, as that review did significant damage to their reputation (go the Wikipedia quick and look up all the awards they were getting up to 2011).

Thanks for refreshing my memory

Just reading that quote made me laugh again.

I really enjoyed Dragon Age 2, even with the somewhat dumbed down mechanics.

 Ouze wrote:
I really enjoyed Dragon Age 2, even with the somewhat dumbed down mechanics.

DA2 was a mediocre game. It was received extremely negatively because of being the successor to DA:Origins which was an outstanding game. It was a mediocre game, but a terrible successor. Still, calling it the "pinnacle of RPG" etc. was just...well...it paid well, I hope

 Sigvatr wrote:

DA2 was a mediocre game. It was received extremely negatively because of being the successor to DA:Origins which was an outstanding game. It was a mediocre game, but a terrible successor. Still, calling it the "pinnacle of RPG" etc. was just...well...it paid well, I hope

I really hope DA3 doesn't suck, but considering the quality curve of the ME series I'm not holding on to much hope.

 dogma wrote:


I really hope DA3 doesn't suck, but considering the quality curve of the ME series I'm not holding on to much hope.

ME3 was an improvement for me over ME2. Not the perfect improvement, but a much improved improvement Yeah the story was still bad, but at least ME3 had a story (as opposed to Side Quests the Game). I'm waiting for reviews, but yes my faith is weak. Even after it releases, it would require me to redownload Origin, which I will happily do when they give me back my ME3, which I still can't play because Origin is a piece of trash!

 LordofHats wrote:

ME3 was an improvement for me over ME2. Not the perfect improvement, but a much improved improvement I'm waiting for reviews, but yes my faith is weak. Even after it releases, it would require me to redownload Origin, which I will happily do when they give me back my ME3, which I still can't play because Origin is a piece of trash!

Preach it brother. I still can't access, or even repurchase, any of my DLC for DA:O and EA's customer support told me "It is a known issue we do not intend to fix.". That alone has me waffling on whether or not I'll even buy the damn game.

Thankfully Witcher 3 is quickly approaching.