Don't know who "Phil Fish" is  and I didn't care.

 Doubt the dude will ever effect my gaming.


- Ed C.

Quote from: Doom;787720I read the link...still not seeing it. I'll buy Quinn (one person) was doing some inappropriate things with some game journalists (regarding one person's game)...I'll buy that 4chan tried to mobilize people against gamers (4chan really isn't a consortium of game journalists, however)...I'll buy the mods of 4chan are "not the best" (gee whiz, lots of sites have questionable moderation, and, again, 4chan aren't game journalists).

But where's the Game Journalist's Union or *something* that would give me the slightest reason to believe even a significant proportion of game journalists are anything beyond dudes that play and happen to review games?

The part where they colluded together on a messageboard, deciding in a group what they would, and what they would NOT cover, regarding news stories. And this isn't low-level stuff; we're talking managing editors setting out mandates.

Quote from: Snowman0147;787739By that line of logic you could say activists are the cause and solution to social justice warriors.  You and I know that is bullshit.  No person that truly want to have equality desire a group of people that goes out and demand superiority that is disguised as equality...

That's where I think you're mistaken, to use your example. I definitely bet that SJWs see themselves as activists. They are just shitty activists.

Unless "gamer" has some weird definition beyond, "person who likes to play games", then to say that these people are not gamers too is equally bull. They're just shitty gamers. It's not to discount the efforts made to fight and repair the damage being done by the bad actors, but to admit that they are a part of the same landscape, and in this case, for the worse.

No this is where you are making the mistake.  Just because social justice warriors see themselves as activists doesn't really make themselves into activists.  You have to be not a human garbage to be a real activists.  You have to actually get off your ass and help people in real ways even if it does risk your life.  You have to actually be a selfless person that gives a damn about the well being of others which is the exact opposite of what social justice warriors do.

Just because some trolls see themselves as gamers doesn't make them gamers.  If they were real gamers they would make the gaming hobby better and not for worst.  They wouldn't say racial slurs, sexist remarks, and death threats in online matches.  If they were real gamers they would just play the game and say good game at the end of the match.  They would act like adults.  Hell they might join those that make charity events that is design to help people like what other gamers had done.

I don't see social justice warriors as activists because they DO NOT DESERVE IT.  I do not see trolls as gamers because THEY DO NOT DESERVE IT.

Quote from: Snowman0147;787802No this is where you are making the mistake.  Just because social justice warriors see themselves as activists doesn't really make themselves into activists.  You have to be not a human garbage to be a real activists.  You have to actually get off your ass and help people in real ways even if it does risk your life.  You have to actually be a selfless person that gives a damn about the well being of others which is the exact opposite of what social justice warriors do.

This is sounding a bit like the No True Scotsman fallacy, to be honest; certainly throughout much of the twentieth century, this definition of activist hasn't applied to most self-professed activists.

Well I am sorry if people choose to confuse slackivists with activists because those two have different agendas.  Slackivists want to control and profit from the causes that activists do.  They will not hesitate to use that cause as a shield to defend their shit actions.  Activisits just want to help people and make the world a better place.  You can scream scotsman fallacy all you want, but as far as I am concern they are two separate things.  One is just so happen to leech off the work and concerns of the other.

Is there a way to get a thread to stop showing up in my "USER CP" list?

Or do I just have to remember that this thread has totally jumped the shark  and avoid reopening it?

Quote from: JamesV;787754That's where I think you're mistaken, to use your example. I definitely bet that SJWs see themselves as activists. They are just shitty activists.

Unless "gamer" has some weird definition beyond, "person who likes to play games", then to say that these people are not gamers too is equally bull. They're just shitty gamers. It's not to discount the efforts made to fight and repair the damage being done by the bad actors, but to admit that they are a part of the same landscape, and in this case, for the worse.

Actually, I generally agree with both your points.

I doubt anyone wakes up in the USA, and goes "I feel like oppressing someone today!" But the road to hell can be paved in good intentions, and it's important to sometimes reflect on your opponents arguments. If your argument cannot survive their critique, you may need to adjust your position.

As to "gamers" though, I think several of the Games Journalists would be highly offended to be labeled as such, given the absolute vitriol heaped upon "Gamers" by journalists in articles and especially Twitter in the last month. They seem to very pointedly to consider "Gamers" sub-human trolls, worthy of nothing but the greatest of scorn.

EDIT: Though, to be fair, the Journalists seem to be engaged in definition games; their definition of "Gamer" is less the common usage "someone who plays games", and more "misogynistic catpissmen". Which people who identify as Gamers, but not as catpissmen, naturally resist. Just as I think anyone who grew up in the ghetto would resist being called a "hoodrat", which Leigh Alexander apparently thinks is a "nicer term" for them.

I've been avoiding this whole internet event except for a cursory glance at the start.

It seems that the whole thing is overshadowed by the accusations of misogyny.

Putting aside that whole other issue (which is worthy of discussing on its own), WAS there any validity to the accusations of nepotism and corruption?

Quote from: Necrozius;788049Putting aside that whole other issue (which is worthy of discussing on its own), WAS there any validity to the accusations of nepotism and corruption?

She slept with a games writer, chronologically after he had written about her game. I think that it's a safe bet, though, that other people in the games industry have slept together at some point, so... that's exciting, clearly.

Games journalism remains utterly corrupt, of course, but that's due to games sites being funded by games publishers and dependent on publishers for access and news to publish, and so having an incentive to only write what pleases their masters. Note how nobody is getting upset about that, actual, corruption...

Quote from: Necrozius;788049I've been avoiding this whole internet event except for a cursory glance at the start.

It seems that the whole thing is overshadowed by the accusations of misogyny.

Putting aside that whole other issue (which is worthy of discussing on its own), WAS there any validity to the accusations of nepotism and corruption?

Maybe. It's hard to filter out of the noise, but it seems like some really skeevy stuff has been going on. Which is the same shit that's been going on for years, and has blown up before.

The funny thing is, it's the massive 'the other side is a bunch of sexist oppressors' bunch that have given this whole thing the sustainability it's had. It's the concerted push back by that group that has pissed off people so much, that people are digging. And unsurprisingly, finding things that while hardly damning, and indicative of a larger problem, at which point there's more push back.  And more digging.  Etc.

Zoe Quinn would have gotten the same spotlight that Phil Fish had, that several other game devs have gotten, (Although I hesitate to call anyone who calls a hyperlinked HTML file a game, even said, I'd review it positively) except like the issue with Zak S and RPGPundit, it was the smear campaign against the people speaking out that made it an issue.

If not for that? This whole thing would have been forgotten in a few days.

Round of applause for the idiots, please.

Quote from: Ladybird;788054Games journalism remains utterly corrupt, of course, but that's due to games sites being funded by games publishers and dependent on publishers for access and news to publish, and so having an incentive to only write what pleases their masters. Note how nobody is getting upset about that, actual, corruption...

In many kinds of vertical market news that involve development and manufacturing, you have a similar situation - even with print magazines. Subscriptions yield little revenue as compared to advertising. Some magazines try to put up a firewall between editorial and advertising, while others find a least harmful collusion method.

The difference is in the specifics of the video game market and those attracted to it - driven by constant change, youth, and big money - and maybe a little less cutthroat than music and other types of entertainment.

Quote from: Warboss Squee;788055Zoe Quinn would have gotten the same spotlight that Phil Fish had, that several other game devs have gotten, (Although I hesitate to call anyone who calls a hyperlinked HTML file a game, even said, I'd review it positively) except like the issue with Zak S and RPGPundit, it was the smear campaign against the people speaking out that made it an issue.

Would you describe a Fighting Fantasy book, frex, as being a game? And if so, what's the difference between a book and an HTML file? Given that the two mediums are basically interchangeable into each other...

The "people speaking out" got "attacked" because their sole complaint was "woman dares involve herself in game industry, attempts to make game other than Call of Duty, whaaarglebargle". They're the same group that complains about the existence of any game outside of their narrow dudebro niche. They deserved to be called on their shit.

Quote from: Ladybird;788058Would you describe a Fighting Fantasy book, frex, as being a game? And if so, what's the difference between a book and an HTML file? Given that the two mediums are basically interchangeable into each other...

That's actually a good point. Noted!

Quote from: Ladybird;788058The "people speaking out" got "attacked" because their sole complaint was "woman dares involve herself in game industry, attempts to make game other than Call of Duty, whaaarglebargle". They're the same group that complains about the existence of any game outside of their narrow dudebro niche. They deserved to be called on their shit.

Yeah that's what I was wondering. The internet can be a shitty place.

Quote from: Ladybird;788058Would you describe a Fighting Fantasy book, frex, as being a game? And if so, what's the difference between a book and an HTML file? Given that the two mediums are basically interchangeable into each other...

The "people speaking out" got "attacked" because their sole complaint was "woman dares involve herself in game industry, attempts to make game other than Call of Duty, whaaarglebargle". They're the same group that complains about the existence of any game outside of their narrow dudebro niche. They deserved to be called on their shit.

Tic Tac Toe drawn on a napkin in crayon is a game, in my book. Depression Quest is more of an educational 'choose our own adventure book'. And, as I said, it does what it's supposed to do. I however, wouldn't classify it as a game.

That said, boiling down the entirety of the participants of this thing, even in the onset, as a bunch of 'dudebros' out to keep women out of the gaming industry is like saying the current feminist movement is a bunch of dick haters looking for their own personal and unique pound of flesh and using the Femithiest as an example, or basing an opinion on all Muslims on the murderous fucks in ISIS.

It's intellectually dishonest, and serves as a prime example of the bullshit going on. 'I don't like what you/they said, so put the whole thing in a fucking box labeled misogyny, and if anyone asks, show them the label, because treating an entire movement based on the actions of a few assholes (and yes their are some major assholes involved, but the are not the whole) is some sort of magical freaking talisman that sets the mind at ease and makes it easier to coast by the concept that they might have an actual point, are you fucking kidding me?