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.

Nobody needs anybody else’s blessing or permission to have an opinion on a public figure. Personally, being on the front lines in the video game chaos, I’ve formed an opinion of Sarkeesian over literally hundreds of experiences involving her. I can share as many of these as I can remember, but not having had these experiences, in context, it would be difficult to convince anyone to share my opinion on her. We don’t need to argue the semantics of the word “scammer”. Just know that this opinion wasn’t arrived at out of some conspiracy or superficial bias, but was arrived at through a very long, painful experience.

I love video games. I own about 2,500 of them. I was a programmer in the game industry (I worked at Treyarch in early 00s) and I was a writer on two video games much later (the first two DeathSpank games). I eat, sleep, and breathe video games... and yet, I’m here and not on a video game forum. I don’t place the entire blame on Sarkeesian, but there is little doubt that the decline started with her, and the tone was set by her public platform. It would’ve been someone else if not her, and I don’t even think she was the worst actor involved. But she was involved, profited off it, and actively encouraged it. The game industry is slowly recovering, but the damage is substantial and there were many, many casualties.

I’ve seen the exact same thing take over other geek hobbies, including but not limited to Star Wars, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, Magic the Gathering, comic books, science fiction conventions, cosplay, Doctor Who, and a bunch of others. The video game industry, being one of the first, didn’t handle it well and was far more affected, but there’s no doubt that this stupid culture war thing is systematically corrupting and destroying things treasured by geeks. With miniature games, it is not a matter of if, but when.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
IDGAF about her. Unless she goes after Kingdom Death. Then, I might just join Kotaku online in trying to get her banned and censored.

John, you've never had a problem with all the posters here, including me, who often point out KDM's foibles and ridiculous sexualization. What gives Sarkesian such power over you?

KDM has always generated a healthy level of objection from a portion of the market. That KDM takes that and keeps doing its thing anyway is part of the charm.

None here are creating public controversy as a minor celebrity. She might.

KDM generates a excessive amount of complaint about superficial appearance, among ignorant people who paint it as Larry Flynt's Hustler of board gaming, when it's really not. At all.

Do you remember the thread where Family Circus mentioned the Blood Angels? I bet more people read that strip than will ever learn about Sarkesian's views of Warhammer. I really don't see how she is some great threat who will embiggened all our problems.

To be fair, it is very easy to misunderstand KDM as just another Brother Vinnie type of exploitation until one digs in because the initial presentation didn't focus on any of the things that made it stand out. Poots' most famous update has to be the one about how to draw big butts the right way.

If Family Circus mentioned Kingdom Death, I wouldn't have an issue because it's a comic strip. One and done, and the vast majority of readers would gloss over it, or assume it was fake. I don't believe that Family Circus has an axe to grind. Unlike Anita, who definitely does.

I like the look of a more muscular girl, but that post was glorious. The game is great, where gender only matters for reproducing.

Baffled as to why. Embarrassing

 Sqorgar wrote:
Nobody needs anybody else’s blessing or permission to have an opinion on a public figure. Personally, being on the front lines in the video game chaos, I’ve formed an opinion of Sarkeesian over literally hundreds of experiences involving her. I can share as many of these as I can remember, but not having had these experiences, in context, it would be difficult to convince anyone to share my opinion on her. We don’t need to argue the semantics of the word “scammer”. Just know that this opinion wasn’t arrived at out of some conspiracy or superficial bias, but was arrived at through a very long, painful experience.

I love video games. I own about 2,500 of them. I was a programmer in the game industry (I worked at Treyarch in early 00s) and I was a writer on two video games much later (the first two DeathSpank games). I eat, sleep, and breathe video games... and yet, I’m here and not on a video game forum. I don’t place the entire blame on Sarkeesian, but there is little doubt that the decline started with her, and the tone was set by her public platform. It would’ve been someone else if not her, and I don’t even think she was the worst actor involved. But she was involved, profited off it, and actively encouraged it. The game industry is slowly recovering, but the damage is substantial and there were many, many casualties.

I’ve seen the exact same thing take over other geek hobbies, including but not limited to Star Wars, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, Magic the Gathering, comic books, science fiction conventions, cosplay, Doctor Who, and a bunch of others. The video game industry, being one of the first, didn’t handle it well and was far more affected, but there’s no doubt that this stupid culture war thing is systematically corrupting and destroying things treasured by geeks. With miniature games, it is not a matter of if, but when.

1). The culture was has been escalating for decades and there will be more overspill into every day life. It's unavoidable at this point. But that doesn't mean the things we love are destroyed; it just means we have to learn better how not to let the bastards get us down. She has no inherent power over the industry, except the power that is given to her by the gamers who react to and magnify her words.

2). Video game communities have been toxic for more than 20 years.*. Sarkesian is not the cause of any of this. She's just one leaf on the river.


*I remember being shocked by the onslaught of racism, homophobia, and rape enthusiasm on the Starcraft servers back in '98. I just wanted to play some $$Big Game Hunter$$$.

On one hand it is good to see the industry embrace her, if only as a middle finger to gamergate which was a disgusting and embarrassing spasm by babies upset at women daring to offer critiques of gender in videogames. For the most part, not even particularly deep or complex analyses.

On the other hand I don't see her relevance to tabletop gaming.

On balance, a positive.

 Sqorgar wrote:
Nobody needs anybody else’s blessing or permission to have an opinion on a public figure. Personally, being on the front lines in the video game chaos, I’ve formed an opinion of Sarkeesian over literally hundreds of experiences involving her. I can share as many of these as I can remember, but not having had these experiences, in context, it would be difficult to convince anyone to share my opinion on her. We don’t need to argue the semantics of the word “scammer”. Just know that this opinion wasn’t arrived at out of some conspiracy or superficial bias, but was arrived at through a very long, painful experience.

I love video games. I own about 2,500 of them. I was a programmer in the game industry (I worked at Treyarch in early 00s) and I was a writer on two video games much later (the first two DeathSpank games). I eat, sleep, and breathe video games... and yet, I’m here and not on a video game forum. I don’t place the entire blame on Sarkeesian, but there is little doubt that the decline started with her, and the tone was set by her public platform. It would’ve been someone else if not her, and I don’t even think she was the worst actor involved. But she was involved, profited off it, and actively encouraged it. The game industry is slowly recovering, but the damage is substantial and there were many, many casualties.

I’ve seen the exact same thing take over other geek hobbies, including but not limited to Star Wars, Star Trek, Ghostbusters, Magic the Gathering, comic books, science fiction conventions, cosplay, Doctor Who, and a bunch of others. The video game industry, being one of the first, didn’t handle it well and was far more affected, but there’s no doubt that this stupid culture war thing is systematically corrupting and destroying things treasured by geeks. With miniature games, it is not a matter of if, but when.

Obviously, you have deeply held opinions about this and I don't mean to be flippant. But from where I am sitting, video games are absolutely awesome and have been for three plus years. The problems in video games that I see are things switching to a "games as service" model, exploitative microtransations, and trying to get my students to stop playing bloody fortnite in environmental science lessons. Video games are a cultural juggernaut. While Gamergate is a bit embarrassing, it does not seem to have harmed the medium very much, with excellent games of all stripes coming out left right and centre.

CassianSol wrote:

On one hand it is good to see the industry embrace her, if only as a middle finger to gamergate which was a disgusting and embarrassing spasm by babies upset at women daring to offer critiques of gender in videogames. For the most part, not even particularly deep or complex analyses.

On the other hand I don't see her relevance to tabletop gaming.

On balance, a positive.

Here's another prime example of someone who doesn't know what they're talking about. It wasn't even that bad. Sure, some guys were pathetic but a lot of them had valid concerns and valid arguments. Generalizing them is either intellectually lazy, or flat-out dishonest.

"LOL they are babies and they hate women!"

"Oh why are all these guys mad?"

People always saying they want to 'start a conversation', but then when he conversation isn't 100% agreement, the name-calling and labeling begins. I don't particularly fear the SJWoowoos, but I can see quite clearly why people loathe them and want them as far away from their recreation as possible.

See, I can play the generalization game, too. And I have some merit to mine. It seems like a huge majority of people who hated gamergate, namely the males- tend to be sexual predators. Seems like they are trying too hard.

 Ketara wrote:

 Galas wrote:
Man, it sucks to not have been aware that Gamergate was even a thing until it ended, avoiding all of that crap, to then just see it reappear every 3-5 months in other places.

I won't lie, having successfully more or less avoided it until now, I'm highly disappointed at how utterly mundane the whole thing seems to be. I mean, when I set out to look into it, I was expecting something mildly salacious and interesting given all the rage and emotive language, not just someone making a ten episode youtube series instead of twelve.

I does seem a bit bizarre, yes. You look at mostly-forgotten scandals from videogame reporting that did more objective harm at the time (anyone remember that guy who got fired for not giving Kane & Lynch 2 the expected glowing review?), then this and wonder "that's it?" Even the most unfavourable readings of what she might have done don't seem to warrant such an obsessive level of attention and ill-will.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
If Family Circus mentioned Kingdom Death, I wouldn't have an issue because it's a comic strip. One and done, and the vast majority of readers would gloss over it, or assume it was fake. I don't believe that Family Circus has an axe to grind. Unlike Anita, who definitely does.

I like the look of a more muscular girl, but that post was glorious. The game is great, where gender only matters for reproducing.

John, you are one of the most blunt posters on this site. When others have axes to grind, you wade in with a hammer. With relish. Neither stature nor venerability nor affiliation held any truck with you when it came time to smash thoughts. I never thought I'd see the day you'd blanche from the prospect of a confrontation conflagration debate on Dakka. What makes this one minor celebrity with an axe to grind so bothersome to you?

 Elemental wrote:
I does seem a bit bizarre, yes. You look at mostly-forgotten scandals from videogame reporting that did more objective harm at the time (anyone remember that guy who got fired for not giving Kane & Lynch 2 the expected glowing review?), then this and wonder "that's it?" Even the most unfavourable readings of what she might have done don't seem to warrant such an obsessive level of attention and ill-will.

A fair point, and there was an outcry over the K&L review. As well as some of the reviews for one of the Halo games with Mountain Dew and Dorito's in the background as the guy reviewed it. And a lot more anger should have been directed at Pay-2-Win, release-date DLC, and gamble-boxes.

It wasn't as bad, I think, because none of those publications or companies flat-out attacked the critics. That's what pissed off the Gamergate people. It's one thing to do something scummy, it's worse when your response is to double down and name-call people.

 Da Boss wrote:
The problems in video games that I see are things switching to a "games as service" model, exploitative microtransations, and trying to get my students to stop playing bloody fortnite in environmental science lessons.

Exactly. We lost our ability to effectively communicate our wishes and complaints because gaming journalism has decided that they alone get to decide what messages are heard. People have a problem with the new Battlefield game, articles come out declaring everybody against its new direction is a white male who hates women. Battlefront 2’s predatory loot boxes had a bunch of articles that were like Star Wars Battlefront has loot boxes - and why that’s a good thing! Our voices can not be heard because the people who are supposed to represent us have decided that we are the enemy.

This makes me happy because I’m in favor of anything that makes gamers this upset.

 Polonius wrote:
This makes me happy because I’m in favor of anything that makes gamers this upset.

Then vote Republican and stop half-assing it.

Sqorgar:Hmm. Perhaps you are more invested in that side of things than I am. I don't listen to those journalists, and haven't for years, ever since I realized what a crock of gak games magazines were and how they stoked false divisions between fans of one or other console back in the 90s. I don't care what the journalists say with regard to games. I get my gaming news from some individual people that I trust and who I know where our tastes align or do not align, and I ignore the rest of it. I have never believed that they were there to represent our interests, seeing them as mostly paid shills for corporations. The sales data and community backlashes will determine what will happen. If I think a game is shady, I don't buy it. I don't need journalists to tell me what's what.

 Da Boss wrote:
If I think a game is shady, I don't buy it. I don't need journalists to tell me what's what.

Now you're cooking with gas, dude. This is fine, it's great, and it's more common than you realize.

And it's part of the problem. When the internet became more common, it changed the landscape. We can go to the game's website and see Dev diaries and screenshots as soon as they come out. We can go to Youtube and watch demos of the game being played. Hell, we can get together and make our OWN gaming journalist page.

...and they know that.

That's why they jump on the smallest controversy and blow it out of proportion- to keep some validity in a dying industry. Those clicks are paychecks.

The problem is, these are the people who get to talk to developers much of the time. Not us. And there's no talking, just shilling. And people are well aware of that. Hence, clickbait controversies.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
If Family Circus mentioned Kingdom Death, I wouldn't have an issue because it's a comic strip. One and done, and the vast majority of readers would gloss over it, or assume it was fake. I don't believe that Family Circus has an axe to grind. Unlike Anita, who definitely does.

I like the look of a more muscular girl, but that post was glorious. The game is great, where gender only matters for reproducing.

John, you are one of the most blunt posters on this site. When others have axes to grind, you wade in with a hammer. With relish. Neither stature nor venerability nor affiliation held any truck with you when it came time to smash thoughts. I never thought I'd see the day you'd blanche from the prospect of a confrontation conflagration debate on Dakka.

What makes this one minor celebrity with an axe to grind so bothersome to you?

All true.

I just don't like her.

I'm excited to hear what she has to say!

 Ketara wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

The specifics aside - you're not coming across as someone with a low level of knowledge trying to figure out what's going on. You're coming across as "I'm just asking questions" in the "Is this person a murderer? Did they beat their wife? Did they cook that man's pet gerbil in a microwave? I don't know, I'm just asking questions..." kind of way that someone who knows exactly what's going on does when they want to bait someone they disagree with into making themselves look silly. If that's not the case I'm sure AD will regret reacting so strongly.

I see. Most be one of those text/tone things. In that case, I'll state here quite clearly that I knew sweet fanny adams really about the matter before I read this thread, and having now looked into it; I'm no closer to seeing why one slightly dreary internet content producer is worthy of any real attention or concern than when I started. She hasn't defrauded anyone, she hasn't done anything particularly offensive, and given the common crossover between miniature games/computer games, I don't see why there should be any controversy over her attending a convention as a guest (assuming she's relevant for a specific point under discussion).

Mostly because she's been pretty unfairly appointed as "The Feminist" despite doing fairly basic and occasionally disingenuous material, initially by clickbait hacks and people who agreed with her assessments, but then as a kind of proxy for both the small minority of actual scumbags and the larger minority who resented being lumped in with the scumbags simply for sharing the same hobby and not 100% agreeing with her assessments. Unfortunately human beings who feel they've been slighted are really, really slow to let things go and, when you factor in all the Culture War garbage swirling around the whole affair it just keeps dragging on.

Frankly at the time I was really annoyed at the whole thing, not just because her shoddy work was used by the very performative "I'm With Her" types to paint basically any male person who played videogames and didn't entirely(as in, 1:1 exactly in all regards and to the same degree) share their politics as a monstrous subhuman, but because that combination of shoddy work being presented as infallible truth resulted in a lot of impressionable kids ending up sucked in by warbing berks like Soggy of Argos and the rest of the Red Pill nutters, doing more damage to their purported cause than their opponents had ever managed before. But that was, like, five years ago and it just needs to go away, which brings us back to "why controversy?" - because she will undoubtedly say something that can be interpreted as provocative, the clickbaitmongers will blow it up into a huge thing, and the Pepe Brigade will start their pish again, leaving the rest of us will have to endure the whole pile of pish once again.

I can't wait for the gakshow this visit for her will be. Maybe I should bring some tomatoes to her panel. Is that still a thing? Shaming charlatans and scammers into disappearing by throwing eggs or tomatoes at them? I'm feeling old.

To anyone who thinks concern about this is an overreaction I would like to point to what has happened to Magic: The Gathering. I game I love, but which can no longer buy in good conscience.

For those unawares, M:TG has gone full SJW over the last few years. To the extent where they now pay a team of investigators to look into players' backgrounds. We aren't talking about behaviour at Wizards' sanctioned events, we are talking about them digging through your social media history and looking through what you post in Facebook groups, even if private. If they don't like your politics, and that can include something as simple as pro-gun ownership (completely unrelated to behaviour) they then use this information to issue bans, which stops people playing in the popular Friday Night Magic with their local group. Those being banned are given a chance to defend themselves but are not presented with a specific charge, which makes this almost impossible. This might seem disreputable, but many people who don't follow the issue as closely will take what the company say as face value and assume what they say is true, hence the destruction of the community begins. It gets worse when employees then dogpile the more high profile people they have banned with libelous accusations without any facts to back them up.

We have seen in numerous geek arenas what happens when SJW policies weave there way in, be it Marvel Comics, Star Wars of Wizards of the Coast. What begins as fairly innocuous changes eventually becomes something more. It drives a proportion of the fanbase away, and then surprisingly there isn't an influx from the non-fan SJWs to replace them. The result is falling profits and smaller, divided communities. None of which is healthy.

 Da Boss wrote:
The sales data and community backlashes will determine what will happen.

But that’s my point. Sales data use if misinterpreted (Solo is underperforming because Star Wars fans didn’t show up when given what they asked for) and community backlashes can be obfuscated by controlling which community voices are amplified, and what message is attributed to them. Right now, a lot of people are upset with the direction the new Battlefield game is going, but the message that is being told is that a bunch of men think girls are icky. The narrative matters to affect the change you want to see, and these people 100% control the narrative. They’ve weapnized it.

It also gets to the point where people are then afraid to voice their opinions for fear of what the consequences for such false accusations will be.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
This makes me happy because I’m in favor of anything that makes gamers this upset.

Then vote Republican and stop half-assing it.

Oh, I don’t want to take away healthcare or food stamps from the 30 year old virgins living in their mom’s basement.

 Polonius wrote:
Oh, I don’t want to take away healthcare or food stamps from the 30 year old virgins living in their mom’s basement.

You're right. Then who would support Feminists like Sarkeesian?

"Mom, lemme use the credit card! I gotta fight sexists for a peepee touch!"

I personally do not like Anita after watching her review of Hitman: Absolution.

Blatant lies. All of it. I had played the game to completion and her explanation was so far off the mark into her personal narrative it was insulting to watch. Watch it yourselves if you want, but don't, it's pure projection of her ideas.

I then understood her making videos have no replies - can't have people discussing or going against the narrative can we? So yeah. Personally seeing her lie makes me very weary of her putting ANY interest into anything. And how she was crucified over her treatment of Boogie I'll never know.

Wait, you're saying that her one-sided feminist narrative trumps the facts? That's sexiest!

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Polonius wrote:
Oh, I don’t want to take away healthcare or food stamps from the 30 year old virgins living in their mom’s basement.

You're right. Then who would support Feminists like Sarkeesian?

I always think it's bizarre how the regressive corners of the world have latched onto projection as the primary tactic to use - nevermind that incels motivated primarily by sex are exactly the opposite of feminists, it must be those darn feminzis who are lonely men motivated by sex!

It's like somehow asserting it in a condescending way makes it true, it would be funnier if it didn't seem like people genuinely believed it.

 ScarletRose wrote:
It's like somehow asserting it in a condescending way makes it true, it would be funnier if it didn't seem like people genuinely believed it.

Maybe when fewer of them get outed as actual sexual predators or perverts, it won't seem like it's part of the stereotype.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 ScarletRose wrote:
It's like somehow asserting it in a condescending way makes it true, it would be funnier if it didn't seem like people genuinely believed it.

Maybe when fewer of them get outed as actual sexual predators or perverts, it won't seem like it's part of the stereotype.

"the stereotype"? You mean the one you just made up right? Again, bald-faced assertions aren't facts, even when typed on a miniatures board.