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.
2014/10/01 13:43:51
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
This is probably the best summary of Bayonetta I've read (story spoilers ahead!):
Spoiler:
bayonetta is an interesting one and actually ripe for some very strange deconstructions if people want to read too much into it (consider, for example, the only females who fight for god are faceless female angels who are destroyed by orgasms - not even joking).
on the other hand, the developers pretty clearly just made bayonetta stupidly over the top because they thought it was funny - the project director even notes that they kept upping the stupid sex stuff until they collectively decided it had gone too far. its also interesting to note that her character designer was a woman.
what this does mean is that bayonetta wears its bad sexual politics on its outside - it is full of male gaze and crotch shots. however, what they dont do is do any of the slightly weird stuff with female characters where they pretend they are powerful then put them in situations where they have to be rescued, or undercut them by presenting them as emotionally weak, etc. bayonetta is unique in being, in effect, a demigod (who finishes the game by punching the (female) god into the sun by constructing the (female) queen of hell out of her own hair - the punch is measured in infinitons... obviously) and never seems to be in the slightest bit of danger. the pseudo love interest is set up as an object of mockery who she never even touches. the almost entirely male angel protagonists monologue at her and she laughs at them and then destroys them. it is also interesting that her violence is very feminised - she has ice skates, butterfly wings, summons high heels to smash things and so on. it is interesting how many girls i have talked to who managed to enjoy it despite the ostensibly terrible presentation simply because they liked the way it made them feel like being female was pretty awesome. its also worth noting that they take the conventional game structure of the forces of light versus dark and put you on the feminine, lunar side of the things.
on the other hand, i suspect virtually none of this was done that deliberately. there seems to have been a fair element of them just making the silly game they wanted to make and stuffing it full of the usual semiotic soup that japanese developers love and getting slightly lucky that they didnt run straight off the cliff of terrible sexual politics.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/01 13:48:44
"With pop hits provin' unlikely, Captain Beefheart retreated to a cabin to shout at his band for months on end. The result was Trout Mask Replica."
2014/10/01 13:58:38
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
CorporateLogo wrote: This is probably the best summary of Bayonetta I've read (story spoilers ahead!):
Spoiler:
bayonetta is an interesting one and actually ripe for some very strange deconstructions if people want to read too much into it (consider, for example, the only females who fight for god are faceless female angels who are destroyed by orgasms - not even joking).
on the other hand, the developers pretty clearly just made bayonetta stupidly over the top because they thought it was funny - the project director even notes that they kept upping the stupid sex stuff until they collectively decided it had gone too far. its also interesting to note that her character designer was a woman.
what this does mean is that bayonetta wears its bad sexual politics on its outside - it is full of male gaze and crotch shots. however, what they dont do is do any of the slightly weird stuff with female characters where they pretend they are powerful then put them in situations where they have to be rescued, or undercut them by presenting them as emotionally weak, etc. bayonetta is unique in being, in effect, a demigod (who finishes the game by punching the (female) god into the sun by constructing the (female) queen of hell out of her own hair - the punch is measured in infinitons... obviously) and never seems to be in the slightest bit of danger. the pseudo love interest is set up as an object of mockery who she never even touches. the almost entirely male angel protagonists monologue at her and she laughs at them and then destroys them. it is also interesting that her violence is very feminised - she has ice skates, butterfly wings, summons high heels to smash things and so on. it is interesting how many girls i have talked to who managed to enjoy it despite the ostensibly terrible presentation simply because they liked the way it made them feel like being female was pretty awesome. its also worth noting that they take the conventional game structure of the forces of light versus dark and put you on the feminine, lunar side of the things.
on the other hand, i suspect virtually none of this was done that deliberately. there seems to have been a fair element of them just making the silly game they wanted to make and stuffing it full of the usual semiotic soup that japanese developers love and getting slightly lucky that they didnt run straight off the cliff of terrible sexual politics.
Corporatelogo this has nothing to do with the thread.
On ESRB it is a great way to do it, but I think people here sometimes just read a sentence start getting really angry.
Corporate. What does Bayonetta have to do with gamergate?
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 14:31:09
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
CorporateLogo wrote: This is probably the best summary of Bayonetta I've read (story spoilers ahead!):
Spoiler:
bayonetta is an interesting one and actually ripe for some very strange deconstructions if people want to read too much into it (consider, for example, the only females who fight for god are faceless female angels who are destroyed by orgasms - not even joking).
on the other hand, the developers pretty clearly just made bayonetta stupidly over the top because they thought it was funny - the project director even notes that they kept upping the stupid sex stuff until they collectively decided it had gone too far. its also interesting to note that her character designer was a woman.
what this does mean is that bayonetta wears its bad sexual politics on its outside - it is full of male gaze and crotch shots. however, what they dont do is do any of the slightly weird stuff with female characters where they pretend they are powerful then put them in situations where they have to be rescued, or undercut them by presenting them as emotionally weak, etc. bayonetta is unique in being, in effect, a demigod (who finishes the game by punching the (female) god into the sun by constructing the (female) queen of hell out of her own hair - the punch is measured in infinitons... obviously) and never seems to be in the slightest bit of danger. the pseudo love interest is set up as an object of mockery who she never even touches. the almost entirely male angel protagonists monologue at her and she laughs at them and then destroys them. it is also interesting that her violence is very feminised - she has ice skates, butterfly wings, summons high heels to smash things and so on. it is interesting how many girls i have talked to who managed to enjoy it despite the ostensibly terrible presentation simply because they liked the way it made them feel like being female was pretty awesome. its also worth noting that they take the conventional game structure of the forces of light versus dark and put you on the feminine, lunar side of the things.
on the other hand, i suspect virtually none of this was done that deliberately. there seems to have been a fair element of them just making the silly game they wanted to make and stuffing it full of the usual semiotic soup that japanese developers love and getting slightly lucky that they didnt run straight off the cliff of terrible sexual politics.
Corporatelogo this has nothing to do with the thread.
On ESRB it is a great way to do it, but I think people here sometimes just read a sentence start getting really angry.
Corporate. What does Bayonetta have to do with gamergate?
There you go again, complaining when someone responds about something someone on "your" side said.
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta. Hypocritical of me, I know. I'm an adult, I can make my own decisions. I don't need some SJW demanding that I change and only play games approved by some board of political correctness.
MWHistorian used Bayonetta as an example of a game that SJWs would disapprove of, Corporatelogo disagreed and explained why.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/01 14:31:20
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
2014/10/01 14:36:15
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
CorporateLogo wrote: This is probably the best summary of Bayonetta I've read (story spoilers ahead!):
Spoiler:
bayonetta is an interesting one and actually ripe for some very strange deconstructions if people want to read too much into it (consider, for example, the only females who fight for god are faceless female angels who are destroyed by orgasms - not even joking).
on the other hand, the developers pretty clearly just made bayonetta stupidly over the top because they thought it was funny - the project director even notes that they kept upping the stupid sex stuff until they collectively decided it had gone too far. its also interesting to note that her character designer was a woman.
what this does mean is that bayonetta wears its bad sexual politics on its outside - it is full of male gaze and crotch shots. however, what they dont do is do any of the slightly weird stuff with female characters where they pretend they are powerful then put them in situations where they have to be rescued, or undercut them by presenting them as emotionally weak, etc. bayonetta is unique in being, in effect, a demigod (who finishes the game by punching the (female) god into the sun by constructing the (female) queen of hell out of her own hair - the punch is measured in infinitons... obviously) and never seems to be in the slightest bit of danger. the pseudo love interest is set up as an object of mockery who she never even touches. the almost entirely male angel protagonists monologue at her and she laughs at them and then destroys them. it is also interesting that her violence is very feminised - she has ice skates, butterfly wings, summons high heels to smash things and so on. it is interesting how many girls i have talked to who managed to enjoy it despite the ostensibly terrible presentation simply because they liked the way it made them feel like being female was pretty awesome. its also worth noting that they take the conventional game structure of the forces of light versus dark and put you on the feminine, lunar side of the things.
on the other hand, i suspect virtually none of this was done that deliberately. there seems to have been a fair element of them just making the silly game they wanted to make and stuffing it full of the usual semiotic soup that japanese developers love and getting slightly lucky that they didnt run straight off the cliff of terrible sexual politics.
Corporatelogo this has nothing to do with the thread.
On ESRB it is a great way to do it, but I think people here sometimes just read a sentence start getting really angry.
Corporate. What does Bayonetta have to do with gamergate?
There you go again, complaining when someone responds about something someone on "your" side said.
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta. Hypocritical of me, I know. I'm an adult, I can make my own decisions. I don't need some SJW demanding that I change and only play games approved by some board of political correctness.
MWHistorian used Bayonetta as an example of a game that SJWs would disapprove of, Corporatelogo disagreed and explained why.
hmm. I didn't see that. Continue the conversation then.
But its mostly that thus far he plops in and gives a single line of dialogue and posts something that usually is poorly written and or from a heavily biased or incorrect source.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 14:51:48
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
CorporateLogo wrote: This is probably the best summary of Bayonetta I've read (story spoilers ahead!):
Spoiler:
bayonetta is an interesting one and actually ripe for some very strange deconstructions if people want to read too much into it (consider, for example, the only females who fight for god are faceless female angels who are destroyed by orgasms - not even joking).
on the other hand, the developers pretty clearly just made bayonetta stupidly over the top because they thought it was funny - the project director even notes that they kept upping the stupid sex stuff until they collectively decided it had gone too far. its also interesting to note that her character designer was a woman.
what this does mean is that bayonetta wears its bad sexual politics on its outside - it is full of male gaze and crotch shots. however, what they dont do is do any of the slightly weird stuff with female characters where they pretend they are powerful then put them in situations where they have to be rescued, or undercut them by presenting them as emotionally weak, etc. bayonetta is unique in being, in effect, a demigod (who finishes the game by punching the (female) god into the sun by constructing the (female) queen of hell out of her own hair - the punch is measured in infinitons... obviously) and never seems to be in the slightest bit of danger. the pseudo love interest is set up as an object of mockery who she never even touches. the almost entirely male angel protagonists monologue at her and she laughs at them and then destroys them. it is also interesting that her violence is very feminised - she has ice skates, butterfly wings, summons high heels to smash things and so on. it is interesting how many girls i have talked to who managed to enjoy it despite the ostensibly terrible presentation simply because they liked the way it made them feel like being female was pretty awesome. its also worth noting that they take the conventional game structure of the forces of light versus dark and put you on the feminine, lunar side of the things.
on the other hand, i suspect virtually none of this was done that deliberately. there seems to have been a fair element of them just making the silly game they wanted to make and stuffing it full of the usual semiotic soup that japanese developers love and getting slightly lucky that they didnt run straight off the cliff of terrible sexual politics.
Corporatelogo this has nothing to do with the thread.
On ESRB it is a great way to do it, but I think people here sometimes just read a sentence start getting really angry.
Corporate. What does Bayonetta have to do with gamergate?
There you go again, complaining when someone responds about something someone on "your" side said.
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta. Hypocritical of me, I know. I'm an adult, I can make my own decisions. I don't need some SJW demanding that I change and only play games approved by some board of political correctness.
MWHistorian used Bayonetta as an example of a game that SJWs would disapprove of, Corporatelogo disagreed and explained why.
hmm. I didn't see that. Continue the conversation then.
But its mostly that thus far he plops in and gives a single line of dialogue and posts something that usually is poorly written and or from a heavily biased or incorrect source.
The same could be said for a couple of other posters as well, but you're only attacking the ones that disagree with your overall statement as being "poorly written".
For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back.
2014/10/01 15:17:58
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
CorporateLogo wrote: This is probably the best summary of Bayonetta I've read (story spoilers ahead!):
Spoiler:
bayonetta is an interesting one and actually ripe for some very strange deconstructions if people want to read too much into it (consider, for example, the only females who fight for god are faceless female angels who are destroyed by orgasms - not even joking).
on the other hand, the developers pretty clearly just made bayonetta stupidly over the top because they thought it was funny - the project director even notes that they kept upping the stupid sex stuff until they collectively decided it had gone too far. its also interesting to note that her character designer was a woman.
what this does mean is that bayonetta wears its bad sexual politics on its outside - it is full of male gaze and crotch shots. however, what they dont do is do any of the slightly weird stuff with female characters where they pretend they are powerful then put them in situations where they have to be rescued, or undercut them by presenting them as emotionally weak, etc. bayonetta is unique in being, in effect, a demigod (who finishes the game by punching the (female) god into the sun by constructing the (female) queen of hell out of her own hair - the punch is measured in infinitons... obviously) and never seems to be in the slightest bit of danger. the pseudo love interest is set up as an object of mockery who she never even touches. the almost entirely male angel protagonists monologue at her and she laughs at them and then destroys them. it is also interesting that her violence is very feminised - she has ice skates, butterfly wings, summons high heels to smash things and so on. it is interesting how many girls i have talked to who managed to enjoy it despite the ostensibly terrible presentation simply because they liked the way it made them feel like being female was pretty awesome. its also worth noting that they take the conventional game structure of the forces of light versus dark and put you on the feminine, lunar side of the things.
on the other hand, i suspect virtually none of this was done that deliberately. there seems to have been a fair element of them just making the silly game they wanted to make and stuffing it full of the usual semiotic soup that japanese developers love and getting slightly lucky that they didnt run straight off the cliff of terrible sexual politics.
Corporatelogo this has nothing to do with the thread.
On ESRB it is a great way to do it, but I think people here sometimes just read a sentence start getting really angry.
Corporate. What does Bayonetta have to do with gamergate?
There you go again, complaining when someone responds about something someone on "your" side said.
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta. Hypocritical of me, I know. I'm an adult, I can make my own decisions. I don't need some SJW demanding that I change and only play games approved by some board of political correctness.
MWHistorian used Bayonetta as an example of a game that SJWs would disapprove of, Corporatelogo disagreed and explained why.
hmm. I didn't see that. Continue the conversation then.
But its mostly that thus far he plops in and gives a single line of dialogue and posts something that usually is poorly written and or from a heavily biased or incorrect source.
The same could be said for a couple of other posters as well, but you're only attacking the ones that disagree with your overall statement as being "poorly written".
I usually ignore them. But yes I could see that. But I was wondering why people are talking about bayonetta.
That has nothing to do with this thread.This about the scandal and the conspiracy and journalism corruption and anything that happens in it.
I think saying that bayonetta is part of this thread is quite false. That is protrayal of women. The other thread is meant for that. Again. Thats what I mean.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/01 15:21:09
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 15:27:56
Subject: Re:The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Don't book a room with 200 chairs if you've only got 20 people to invite who will cheer you.
I found a lot of what he was saying too difficult to follow, why say something in a few words if you can use dozens? I'm always suspicious of people who puff up what they're saying by being overly verbose, it's because they really have very little to say or it lacks substance.
2014/10/01 15:32:07
Subject: Re:The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Don't book a room with 200 chairs if you've only got 20 people to invite who will cheer you.
I found a lot of what he was saying too difficult to follow, why say something in a few words if you can use dozens? I'm always suspicious of people who puff up what they're saying by being overly verbose, it's because they really have very little to say or it lacks substance.
He sounded sorta nazish
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 15:44:39
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
I usually ignore them. But yes I could see that. But I was wondering why people are talking about bayonetta.
That has nothing to do with this thread.This about the scandal and the conspiracy and journalism corruption and anything that happens in it.
I think saying that bayonetta is part of this thread is quite false. That is protrayal of women. The other thread is meant for that. Again. Thats what I mean.
Gammer gate is nowhere near that cohesive. If it was only about journalistic corruption, then.. well no one would care I think. It's been an open secret for years that isn't going to rouse anyone unless it comes with some adds.
2014/10/01 15:45:21
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
I usually ignore them. But yes I could see that. But I was wondering why people are talking about bayonetta.
That has nothing to do with this thread.This about the scandal and the conspiracy and journalism corruption and anything that happens in it.
I think saying that bayonetta is part of this thread is quite false. That is protrayal of women. The other thread is meant for that. Again. Thats what I mean.
Gammer gate is nowhere near that cohesive. If it was only about journalistic corruption, then.. well no one would care I think. It's been an open secret for years that isn't going to rouse anyone unless it comes with some adds.
Mostly due to the fact we lack a single authority or leader
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 15:49:39
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: That has nothing to do with this thread.This about the scandal and the conspiracy and journalism corruption and anything that happens in it.
I think saying that bayonetta is part of this thread is quite false. That is protrayal of women. The other thread is meant for that. Again. Thats what I mean.
Why did you not react to all those messages about trigger warning being stupid or not stupid? They were not about scandal or conspiracy or journalist corruption. Why did you not react to this:
MWHistorian wrote: That's where the SJW comes in. They shame and force others to their viewpoint.
I for one agree that the games tend to be sexist and masochistic, but not the degree the SJW's do. I'm not going to villainize a whole group of people because they like to watch beautiful women or prefer to play male characters. I'm not going to force game makers to be politically correct. What I can do is try to shift people's opinions.
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta. Hypocritical of me, I know. I'm an adult, I can make my own decisions. I don't need some SJW demanding that I change and only play games approved by some board of political correctness.
This is not about scandal or conspiracy or journalist corruption.
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/10/01 15:55:37
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: That has nothing to do with this thread.This about the scandal and the conspiracy and journalism corruption and anything that happens in it.
I think saying that bayonetta is part of this thread is quite false. That is protrayal of women. The other thread is meant for that. Again. Thats what I mean.
Why did you not react to all those messages about trigger warning being stupid or not stupid? They were not about scandal or conspiracy or journalist corruption. Why did you not react to this:
MWHistorian wrote: That's where the SJW comes in. They shame and force others to their viewpoint.
I for one agree that the games tend to be sexist and masochistic, but not the degree the SJW's do. I'm not going to villainize a whole group of people because they like to watch beautiful women or prefer to play male characters. I'm not going to force game makers to be politically correct. What I can do is try to shift people's opinions.
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta. Hypocritical of me, I know. I'm an adult, I can make my own decisions. I don't need some SJW demanding that I change and only play games approved by some board of political correctness.
This is not about scandal or conspiracy or journalist corruption.
Its all interconnected. It's not JUST about journalist corruption. It's also about how the journalists have a heavy political agenda in which they want to show the gamer culture as a bunch of racist, misogynistic neanderthals and that they'll lie to do it.
Like someone else said, if it was just about journalists being advertisements, no one would really care.
Also, check out my history blog: Minimum Wage Historian, a fun place to check out history that often falls between the couch cushions.
2014/10/01 15:57:25
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
I usually ignore them. But yes I could see that. But I was wondering why people are talking about bayonetta.
That has nothing to do with this thread.This about the scandal and the conspiracy and journalism corruption and anything that happens in it.
I think saying that bayonetta is part of this thread is quite false. That is protrayal of women. The other thread is meant for that. Again. Thats what I mean.
Gammer gate is nowhere near that cohesive. If it was only about journalistic corruption, then.. well no one would care I think. It's been an open secret for years that isn't going to rouse anyone unless it comes with some adds.
Mostly due to the fact we lack a single authority or leader
I don't think that is it. Lot of movements without leaders can have somewhat cohesive goals. This is just my impression here feel free to disagree. I think the reason GG is so messy is that the movement is disingenuous. It's about so many conflicting things because the people who started it wanted a smoke screen and a noble face to hide their real intentions behind. It basically feels two faced.
Asherian Command wrote: That has nothing to do with this thread.This about the scandal and the conspiracy and journalism corruption and anything that happens in it.
I think saying that bayonetta is part of this thread is quite false. That is protrayal of women. The other thread is meant for that. Again. Thats what I mean.
Why did you not react to all those messages about trigger warning being stupid or not stupid? They were not about scandal or conspiracy or journalist corruption. Why did you not react to this:
MWHistorian wrote: That's where the SJW comes in. They shame and force others to their viewpoint.
I for one agree that the games tend to be sexist and masochistic, but not the degree the SJW's do. I'm not going to villainize a whole group of people because they like to watch beautiful women or prefer to play male characters. I'm not going to force game makers to be politically correct. What I can do is try to shift people's opinions.
I occasionally enjoy games like GTA or Bayonetta. Hypocritical of me, I know. I'm an adult, I can make my own decisions. I don't need some SJW demanding that I change and only play games approved by some board of political correctness.
This is not about scandal or conspiracy or journalist corruption.
Its all interconnected. It's not JUST about journalist corruption. It's also about how the journalists have a heavy political agenda in which they want to show the gamer culture as a bunch of racist, misogynistic neanderthals and that they'll lie to do it.
Like someone else said, if it was just about journalists being advertisements, no one would really care.
And actually this is kind of what I am talking about. The second face of GG is less about journalists, but about purging gaming of these "political" elements. I have had a few people tell me things along the line of this is to get Anita/feminist out of games, or to stop people from talking about sexism in games. On the ugly side of GG, it's more about silencing people they call SJW.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2014/10/01 16:13:14
2014/10/01 16:28:39
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
And actually this is kind of what I am talking about. The second face of GG is less about journalists, but about purging gaming of these "political" elements. I have had a few people tell me things along the line of this is to get Anita/feminist out of games, or to stop people from talking about sexism in games. On the ugly side of GG, it's more about silencing people they call SJW.
I see that as well.
I mean sexism should be addressed but not in the way it currently is done.
It is too balanat too overall attack on gaming.
It is too much generalization and not specifics.
Condemning a large population is not the way to go about things.
But you will see that in every movement, no matter which movement it is.
There will always will be different parts of an argument. Some may agree over specifics other times they will not.
This is not about scandal or conspiracy or journalist corruption.
This is about scandals, conspiracy and journalist corruption.
This is about people who are corrupt and have problems confronting they are biased, or they know about the corruption and do nothing about it.
They acknowledge but they do nothing about i.
In order to change there needs to be something done about it in the scene.
Hopefully this is the restart button for gaming journalism.
Where they look at themselves and see what they have become and become afraid.
And try to change themselves.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 17:07:48
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
MWHistorian wrote: Its all interconnected. It's not JUST about journalist corruption. It's also about how the journalists have a heavy political agenda in which they want to show the gamer culture as a bunch of racist, misogynistic neanderthals and that they'll lie to do it.
Like someone else said, if it was just about journalists being advertisements, no one would really care.
“Gamergate is totally not about sexism or feminism. It is only about journalists that want to fight sexism because they are feminists. But don't you dare say it is about sexism or feminism, it is only about corruption.”
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/10/01 17:13:08
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
And actually this is kind of what I am talking about. The second face of GG is less about journalists, but about purging gaming of these "political" elements. I have had a few people tell me things along the line of this is to get Anita/feminist out of games, or to stop people from talking about sexism in games. On the ugly side of GG, it's more about silencing people they call SJW.
I see that as well.
I mean sexism should be addressed but not in the way it currently is done.
It is too balanat too overall attack on gaming.
It is too much generalization and not specifics.
Condemning a large population is not the way to go about things.
But you will see that in every movement, no matter which movement it is.
There will always will be different parts of an argument. Some may agree over specifics other times they will not.
You see it, but dose it bother you? It bothers me. I don't see a gammer purge as good thing.
I would like to see a more open, more gammer involved discussion of issues of sexism/racism/all the other little issues we avoid talking about. I don't think GG wants to talk at all. The impression is get is that they want to stop or silence debate on these issues.
You mentioned this might be a reset button for gaming journalism. I worry what kind of journalism could emerge from a movement like this. This movement doesn't feel like a call for free independent games journalism that can tackle and discuss the big issues. It very much feels like the inverse of that. A call for games journalism that agrees with what the majority of it's audience believes or we will call your advertisers and tell on you. A big big part of journalism is saying things that people don't want to hear. It's not about confirming your basis, it's about challenging you to see other views and to look at things in a wider scope. Yes that even includes looking at games/gammers and asking is there some kind of misogyny going on here?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/01 17:20:04
2014/10/01 17:58:22
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
On a side note, I am really getting a bit tired of misogyny being used synonymously with sexism. I get it, it's the new buzzword because you have to trot out a new one every few years to get people paying attention again, but come on.
I would ascribe actual misogyny to such a tiny portion of GG as to render it irrelevant. Ditto the industry insofar as an industry can be said to have collective 'feelings'.
Hating specific women for specific reasons - even if that reason is simply because you find them annoying or whatever isn't misogyny. It's just good old fashioned hate.
2014/10/01 17:59:25
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Bromsy wrote: On a side note, I am really getting a bit tired of misogyny being used synonymously with sexism. I get it, it's the new buzzword because you have to trot out a new one every few years to get people paying attention again, but come on.
I would ascribe actual misogyny to such a tiny portion of GG as to render it irrelevant. Ditto the industry insofar as an industry can be said to have collective 'feelings'.
Hating specific women for specific reasons - even if that reason is simply because you find them annoying or whatever isn't misogyny. It's just good old fashioned hate.
Agreed. You are not a misogynist if you disagree with a woman.
You see it, but dose it bother you? It bothers me. I don't see a gammer purge as good thing.
I would like to see a more open, more gammer involved discussion of issues of sexism/racism/all the other little issues we avoid talking about. I don't think GG wants to talk at all. The impression is get is that they want to stop or silence debate on these issues.
You mentioned this might be a reset button for gaming journalism. I worry what kind of journalism could emerge from a movement like this. This movement doesn't feel like a call for free independent games journalism that can tackle and discuss the big issues. It very much feels like the inverse of that. A call for games journalism that agrees with what the majority of it's audience believes or we will call your advertisers and tell on you. A big big part of journalism is saying things that people don't want to hear. It's not about confirming your basis, it's about challenging you to see other views and to look at things in a wider scope. Yes that even includes looking at games/gammers and asking is there some kind of misogyny going on here?
It does bother me. But this movement is not about misgony. It is not bout the hate of women.
IT is about the corruption and the agendas these people are pushing for. They could be from my same view point and I would still criticize them. They are wrong to push their agenda in a game review. They should not rate a game because it insulted their personnal view point.
It will be a discussion and people do talk about it. Some gamers don't and thats fine. But they will be dragged into it one day. But lets deal with the issue at hand.
Journalism and the problem from within it.
Why worry? You don't want more yahtzees? More objectivity? Better reviews where it reviews games for everything? And not acting biased.
I would like to see a more open, more gammer involved discussion of issues of sexism/racism/all the other little issues we avoid talking about. I don't think GG wants to talk at all. The impression is get is that they want to stop or silence debate on these issues.
It will happen. Just wait and be patient.
It will be brought up. But it is a significant minority that are homophobic, or sexist or racist, But they are extremely vocal.
I think though we reward people for those that talk about hard subjects in gaming.
Depression quest is not the first game that has done what it has done. And it is being glorified. That I find insulting to games in the past that are being ignored and have done something far better and have done it in a better way. Its pretentious idea.
But this isn't what people want these aren't good subjects they are facing things that are biased completely. We want them to disclose themselves.
We don't want them to hold power.
They can talk about these subjects as long as they are factual about it, and not making up things based on hearsay.
So far they have not done this. They have lied and cheated. They have used each other as sources. That is not accurate.
They are in collision with each other and constantly put down the consumer.
A true journalist, does not attack their audience, they point out the truth, but they do so in an objective way, they back up with reasoning that is sound and with facts, They do not attack like a dog backed into a corner.
If they say they wish to represent the audience and their best intentions they will talk about the game in a objective way. They will offer both sides of an opinion without being a jerk.
To see more than a small viewpoint. Journalism is about the freedom of speech, exercising that is good. But if you use it to further your agenda for a movement that forgets to research its topic extensively then yes.
The press should not always praise someone. They should be able to criticize without being labeled as a misogynist. That is the problem though. Criticism is being seen as harassment. If you do not accept criticism you do not belong in the realm of writing or in the media in general. IF you do not know the difference between criticism and harassment you have a lot to learn and you might as well quit your job. Because you do not deserve to be in this field
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 18:33:10
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Bromsy wrote: On a side note, I am really getting a bit tired of misogyny being used synonymously with sexism. I get it, it's the new buzzword because you have to trot out a new one every few years to get people paying attention again, but come on.
I would ascribe actual misogyny to such a tiny portion of GG as to render it irrelevant. Ditto the industry insofar as an industry can be said to have collective 'feelings'.
Hating specific women for specific reasons - even if that reason is simply because you find them annoying or whatever isn't misogyny. It's just good old fashioned hate.
I was not using misogyny as a replacement for sexism. I was using it as it's defined. A hatred or contempt for women. I also wasn't saying that GG is no question misogynistic. I was more saying that it's some times important that people be able to ask and talk about the question. Are gamers misogynistic, or more accepting of misogyny, is a question I ponder some times. (The answer I come up with most times is maybe or some in case you need vindication. Some times I see some really gross bile come from gaming, but most people I meet aren't horrible people.)
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/10/01 18:42:48
2014/10/01 18:38:06
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: IT is about the corruption and the agendas these people are pushing for. They could be from my same view point and I would still criticize them. They are wrong to push their agenda in a game review. They should not rate a game because it insulted their personnal view point.
Forget about the marks for a second. Now, if someone reads “This game is sadly sexualizing every female characters, which is a bad thing” and that person actually like female character to be sexualized, it will make him or her want to play the game. And it works the other way around. It is actually a subjective opinion on some relatively objective fact. So, why care about this that much?
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/10/01 18:51:26
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
You see it, but dose it bother you? It bothers me. I don't see a gammer purge as good thing.
I would like to see a more open, more gammer involved discussion of issues of sexism/racism/all the other little issues we avoid talking about. I don't think GG wants to talk at all. The impression is get is that they want to stop or silence debate on these issues.
You mentioned this might be a reset button for gaming journalism. I worry what kind of journalism could emerge from a movement like this. This movement doesn't feel like a call for free independent games journalism that can tackle and discuss the big issues. It very much feels like the inverse of that. A call for games journalism that agrees with what the majority of it's audience believes or we will call your advertisers and tell on you. A big big part of journalism is saying things that people don't want to hear. It's not about confirming your basis, it's about challenging you to see other views and to look at things in a wider scope. Yes that even includes looking at games/gammers and asking is there some kind of misogyny going on here?
It does bother me. But this movement is not about misgony. It is not bout the hate of women.
IT is about the corruption and the agendas these people are pushing for. They could be from my same view point and I would still criticize them. They are wrong to push their agenda in a game review. They should not rate a game because it insulted their personnal view point.
It will be a discussion and people do talk about it. Some gamers don't and thats fine. But they will be dragged into it one day. But lets deal with the issue at hand.
Journalism and the problem from within it.
Why worry? You don't want more yahtzees? More objectivity? Better reviews where it reviews games for everything? And not acting biased.
I would like to see a more open, more gammer involved discussion of issues of sexism/racism/all the other little issues we avoid talking about. I don't think GG wants to talk at all. The impression is get is that they want to stop or silence debate on these issues.
It will happen. Just wait and be patient.
It will be brought up. But it is a significant minority that are homophobic, or sexist or racist, But they are extremely vocal.
I think though we reward people for those that talk about hard subjects in gaming.
Depression quest is not the first game that has done what it has done. And it is being glorified. That I find insulting to games in the past that are being ignored and have done something far better and have done it in a better way. Its pretentious idea.
But this isn't what people want these aren't good subjects they are facing things that are biased completely. We want them to disclose themselves.
We don't want them to hold power.
They can talk about these subjects as long as they are factual about it, and not making up things based on hearsay.
So far they have not done this. They have lied and cheated. They have used each other as sources. That is not accurate.
They are in collision with each other and constantly put down the consumer.
A true journalist, does not attack their audience, they point out the truth, but they do so in an objective way, they back up with reasoning that is sound and with facts, They do not attack like a dog backed into a corner.
If they say they wish to represent the audience and their best intentions they will talk about the game in a objective way. They will offer both sides of an opinion without being a jerk.
To see more than a small viewpoint. Journalism is about the freedom of speech, exercising that is good. But if you use it to further your agenda for a movement that forgets to research its topic extensively then yes.
The press should not always praise someone. They should be able to criticize without being labeled as a misogynist. That is the problem though. Criticism is being seen as harassment. If you do not accept criticism you do not belong in the realm of writing or in the media in general. IF you do not know the difference between criticism and harassment you have a lot to learn and you might as well quit your job. Because you do not deserve to be in this field
Ya I really do not get the impression that gamergate is about corruption. We have some different views about what gamergate is here. I think because we look at it from different places. Personally I would rather you be right. You know because a nice clean message like "We would like better journalistic ethics" is something I can get behind. Sign me up for good games journalism. It is just the message is so not clean.
I'll diverge a little and blame twitter for the mess. Twitter is not the platform for talking about anything serous. You need more then a brief blurb you tap out on your phone. You want people who sit, think, study and then take time to write a honest and thoughtful thought. (Then again maybe I hate twitter because I am old and don't understand the kids these days. )
2014/10/01 18:59:16
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: IT is about the corruption and the agendas these people are pushing for. They could be from my same view point and I would still criticize them. They are wrong to push their agenda in a game review. They should not rate a game because it insulted their personnal view point.
Forget about the marks for a second. Now, if someone reads “This game is sadly sexualizing every female characters, which is a bad thing” and that person actually like female character to be sexualized, it will make him or her want to play the game. And it works the other way around. It is actually a subjective opinion on some relatively objective fact. So, why care about this that much?
Sexualization is seen as negative. Not a good thing. I don't think someone is going to say. "OH THEY HAVE SEXUALIZED CHARACTERS OH MAN I AM TOTALLY GOING TO BUY THAT GAME!"
I don't think that is a common thing.
I think there are certain things we need to consider in that regard. They are biased and they are pushing an agenda. They want less sexualization which is good, but docking points because it is sexually charged is a bad thing and makes the game worse because of it.
That is a big problem. People really don't care about that. But if you are going through scores people are not going to read the whole review. They will only look for the score. Especially parents. Parents will look at the score and see it lower and will not buy it for their kid. Or will be pushed away from buying it because it has sexual content.
Ya I really do not get the impression that gamergate is about corruption. We have some different views about what gamergate is here. I think because we look at it from different places. Personally I would rather you be right. You know because a nice clean message like "We would like better journalistic ethics" is something I can get behind. Sign me up for good games journalism. It is just the message is so not clean.
I'll diverge a little and blame twitter for the mess. Twitter is not the platform for talking about anything serous. You need more then a brief blurb you tap out on your phone. You want people who sit, think, study and then take time to write a honest and thoughtful thought. (Then again maybe I hate twitter because I am old and don't understand the kids these days. )
i would agree. But the primary people involved with this Christian Sommers, Total Biscuit, Mundane Matt, and that video that was linked. Are only talking about the corruption in games journalism . The minority on here who are only talking about feminists are the problem though we need a more concise opinion that we need better writers in the industry. Ones who understand what you have to do in order to be a good writer.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/01 19:05:24
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 19:09:07
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: IT is about the corruption and the agendas these people are pushing for. They could be from my same view point and I would still criticize them. They are wrong to push their agenda in a game review. They should not rate a game because it insulted their personnal view point.
Forget about the marks for a second. Now, if someone reads “This game is sadly sexualizing every female characters, which is a bad thing” and that person actually like female character to be sexualized, it will make him or her want to play the game. And it works the other way around. It is actually a subjective opinion on some relatively objective fact. So, why care about this that much?
Sexualization is seen as negative. Not a good thing. I don't think someone is going to say. "OH THEY HAVE SEXUALIZED CHARACTERS OH MAN I AM TOTALLY GOING TO BUY THAT GAME!"
I don't think that is a common thing.
I think there are certain things we need to consider in that regard. They are biased and they are pushing an agenda. They want less sexualization which is good, but docking points because it is sexually charged is a bad thing and makes the game worse because of it.
That is a big problem. People really don't care about that. But if you are going through scores people are not going to read the whole review. They will only look for the score. Especially parents. Parents will look at the score and see it lower and will not buy it for their kid. Or will be pushed away from buying it because it has sexual content.
A review is an option peace. It's not like a mathematical thing. Gamers have a hard time understanding this. A review can't be objective. Good, bad, 9.9, 8.8 aren't object measurements. They are subjective scales based on subjective impressions.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/01 19:14:49
2014/10/01 19:17:38
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: Sexualization is seen as negative. Not a good thing. I don't think someone is going to say. "OH THEY HAVE SEXUALIZED CHARACTERS OH MAN I AM TOTALLY GOING TO BUY THAT GAME!"
DoA Beach Volley would like to disagree.
Asherian Command wrote: But if you are going through scores people are not going to read the whole review. They will only look for the score. Especially parents. Parents will look at the score and see it lower and will not buy it for their kid. Or will be pushed away from buying it because it has sexual content.
Then the only problem is score. Get rid of scores. That is something I may agree with. That is certainly not the main concern of most GGers.
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/10/01 19:23:07
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: But if you are going through scores people are not going to read the whole review. They will only look for the score. Especially parents. Parents will look at the score and see it lower and will not buy it for their kid. Or will be pushed away from buying it because it has sexual content.
Then the only problem is score. Get rid of scores. That is something I may agree with. That is certainly not the main concern of most GGers.
Yes 100% dump the numbered scores. They are so dishonest. A review can't be boiled down to a number like that and scores aren't used for anything good. Mostly fan-boy arguments and metacritic stats. I know one gamer who uses a games meta critic score as the alpha and omega of a games quality.
2014/10/01 19:26:40
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Bromsy wrote: On a side note, I am really getting a bit tired of misogyny being used synonymously with sexism. I get it, it's the new buzzword because you have to trot out a new one every few years to get people paying attention again, but come on.
I would ascribe actual misogyny to such a tiny portion of GG as to render it irrelevant. Ditto the industry insofar as an industry can be said to have collective 'feelings'.
Hating specific women for specific reasons - even if that reason is simply because you find them annoying or whatever isn't misogyny. It's just good old fashioned hate.
I was not using misogyny as a replacement for sexism. I was using it as it's defined. A hatred or contempt for women. I also wasn't saying that GG is no question misogynistic. I was more saying that it's some times important that people be able to ask and talk about the question. Are gamers misogynistic, or more accepting of misogyny, is a question I ponder some times. (The answer I come up with most times is maybe or some in case you need vindication. Some times I see some really gross bile come from gaming, but most people I meet aren't horrible people.)
Wasn't referring to your post. If I was I'd have quoted you.
2014/10/01 19:36:23
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: IT is about the corruption and the agendas these people are pushing for. They could be from my same view point and I would still criticize them. They are wrong to push their agenda in a game review. They should not rate a game because it insulted their personnal view point.
Forget about the marks for a second. Now, if someone reads “This game is sadly sexualizing every female characters, which is a bad thing” and that person actually like female character to be sexualized, it will make him or her want to play the game. And it works the other way around. It is actually a subjective opinion on some relatively objective fact. So, why care about this that much?
Sexualization is seen as negative. Not a good thing. I don't think someone is going to say. "OH THEY HAVE SEXUALIZED CHARACTERS OH MAN I AM TOTALLY GOING TO BUY THAT GAME!"
I don't think that is a common thing.
I think there are certain things we need to consider in that regard. They are biased and they are pushing an agenda. They want less sexualization which is good, but docking points because it is sexually charged is a bad thing and makes the game worse because of it.
That is a big problem. People really don't care about that. But if you are going through scores people are not going to read the whole review. They will only look for the score. Especially parents. Parents will look at the score and see it lower and will not buy it for their kid. Or will be pushed away from buying it because it has sexual content.
If you find a problem in a game, you should doc points for it. Like how people took points off ground zeros because it was so short and so expensive. Saying you shouldn't take off points for serialization is a little like saying you can't take off points because you find the games art style bad. A review is an option peace. It's not like a mathematical thing. Gamers have a hard time understanding this. A review can't be objective.
I disagree. There should be a quality held.
If a game lacks multiplayer or does not have a function that is not really seen in the game nor was promised by the designers, It should not be taken off for not having. If a game lacks a quality it should not be put down because of it.
I will however do that if I expect a better story. Because writing a story is easier.
Having sexualization is an idea in a game, it is an art style. It should not be the highest thing that gets rid of points. I think there should be a universal way to rate video games, like how movies are given stars or thumbs up. Those are two rating score paths. There may be others, but we only listen to those types of scores.
With video games it should follow that same path. They should become like the movie industries reviewing scene. They should stop acting like idiots and more like professionals.
Who ever says that objectivity is impossible in games that is a completely false. You can be a mix of both objective and personal. You can mix them, you can do both. And address it as a game and find its strengths and weaknesses. If a game is bad there isn't much to talk about, apart from how bad it is.
You can be objective with games. You can try to be, but that does not mean they can't try to be, the aim is to be objective, the aim is to write like an academic student.
Asherian Command wrote: But if you are going through scores people are not going to read the whole review. They will only look for the score. Especially parents. Parents will look at the score and see it lower and will not buy it for their kid. Or will be pushed away from buying it because it has sexual content.
Then the only problem is score. Get rid of scores. That is something I may agree with. That is certainly not the main concern of most GGers.
Yes 100% dump the numbered scores. They are so dishonest. A review can't be boiled down to a number like that and scores aren't used for anything good. Mostly fan-boy arguments and metacritic stats. I know one gamer who uses a games meta critic score as the alpha and omega of a games quality.
I agree. Scores should be dumped but sadly we can't get rid of them, just like numbers for grades.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/10/01 19:37:20
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/10/01 20:02:44
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: They should become like the movie industries reviewing scene. They should stop acting like idiots and more like professionals.
What the hell are you talking about?
Asherian Command wrote: Scores should be dumped but sadly we can't get rid of them, just like numbers for grades.
Why cannot we?
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/10/01 20:10:33
Subject: The Gamergate, Scandal, Conspiracy, and Journalism Corruption
Asherian Command wrote: I think there should be a universal way to rate video games, like how movies are given stars or thumbs up. Those are two rating score paths. There may be others, but we only listen to those types of scores.
Why you believe the movie review system is better than the gamer review system is beyond me. I have no idea.
So, “Why can we not” is the correct phrase? Because “can't” is not appropriate for formal written English .
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
)