Anyone here ever go to this site before the recent news involving it broke out? It's like reading through youtube comments but with more detailed comments. Lots of Japanese stuff that would appeal to people here--I read some comment thread about Gundam beam weapons, and boy did they expound on that topic. It's a place of excess, a site you could go to every once-a-month, but not something you'd want to lose yourself in on a regular basis.

I've been there several times, but I don't really understand how to navigate it nor do I really want to. My friends have used it and it's loaded with pics and stuff. Just looks like troll heaven.

I have been following this #gamergate fiasco and sadly, 4chan is coming across as a voice of reason. Long story short on the matter, I didn't take too kindly to a bunch of gaming news sites trying to outright attack gamers to cover for their questionable journalism practices. Not trying to start a massive debate here on it or the people involved, but it's really fascinating how it is playing out right now.

I visit 4chan religiously, half because there's some genuinely good threads hidden in the detritus, and half because it constantly makes me laugh my ass off, one of the few places on the web that can do that.

Googling "#gamergate" as we speak. I obviously don't keep up on the Twitters.

We going to keep talking about this in hushed tones, or explain what this's about?

Edit 1: I'm finding mentions of "Anti-feminist sentiment," "Zoe Quinn," "Anita Sarkeesian," "Depression Quest," and "Vivian James."

Edit 2: Good Lord, I am generally amuzed (amazed and amused) by this!

Edit 3: Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGpJ39JBTLo#t=29

XD

I am instantly cured of my existential depression. Thanks for that!

This.

I love how how all the "retorts" from gaming sites have glossed over the fact that "gamers" were upset over the implications this story had in regards to journalistic integrity... not how many times that chick was supposedly plowed or how loose she was.

Here's the thing...One girl sleeps with a bunch of guys to help her game along. Another (an admitted non-gamer who somehow raised $160,000 to do a video series about videogames) puts out a video that cherry-picks examples of poor treatment of women in videogames. No one on these sites dare to challenge them on these things and when people voice their displeasure and their own critiques, they are the ones that get targeted and pigeon-holed as a flock of women-hating angry white gamers by the gaming press (which is ironic, because the press lumped a bunch of people that don't fit that demographic) You just want to slap them and ask them to look at the other side or be critical of what is being spoonfed...Not too dissimilar with watching MSNBC or Fox when they are in full-on agenda mode.

COCKSUCKING VIDEOGAMELAND is a good article to read on this for those who haven't read it.

Vert, old buddy, old friend, I never thought I would see the day when one of those godawful Insomniac articles would make more sense than this drivel:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/2244 … e_over.php

In this case, I can forgive Insomniac for the overall tone and actual writing in favor of the underlying message...Leigh Alexander is a fraud.

Or there could actually be an obvious misogyny problem in gaming and reactions like these only go to confirm that. Many gamers (and I am one but I'm beginning to loathe the term) are revealing themselves to be an angry, bitter, closed-minded bunch prone to overreaction whenever anything in their hobby is called into question.

But then this isn't a surprise to me. For years I've seen gamers react like small children putting their hands over their ears and shouting whenever a study (and there are many) reveals that violent games may have a negative effect on people. The bottom line is gamers don't want to know.

I guess I have been slightly taken aback by the level of vitriol and depths to which people will sink this time, however.

I have found myself wondering if gardeners get so aggressively defensive. Or knitters. Probably not. Maybe playing all those games does have an effect...

Games are serious business.

source: http://www.bit-tech.net/news/gaming/200 … son-soft/1

Okay, let's assume you're right and there is a problem. Shouldn't that critique come from someone inside the gaming community and not someone like Anita Sarkeesian who admits to not really liking or caring about games (and went on to harvest $160,000 for the sole purpose of making videos about games)? Yes, I'm calling her gaming cred into question. That is like me gouging money to do a series of videos to do a piece on the ills of rap music today (I hate rap). No one would take me seriously, even if I did the research. That is like an outsider poking a sleeping bear with a stick...It is just asking for trouble.

On top of that, Anita refuses to accept or acknowledge criticism regarding her points (the money raised, that her footage was stolen from various Let's Play videos, she cherry-picks her examples to fit the story and comments on the videos where questions can be asked are disabled), which to me renders them completely invalid. Most gamers I know absolutely loathe this woman if they know who she is. But again, the issue is the press...No one is questioning these things stated above about her and the people that are questioning her are seen as "truthers" or "harassers of women". It's maddening.

To put it in perspective, her opening argument in her latest video was that men are turned on by the half-naked bodies of dead women. That's really stretching your imagination there.

As for Zoe, it is simply not ethical for journalists to be sleeping with a game developer. OR her boss. The gaming press isn't all-out to question this either? I can't be the only one to smell a rat.

Really, PLEASE read the article I linked and tell me the tone is anywhere near acceptable. It's bitter, angry and hard to understand what she is going on about without context. It is dreck. I was literally shocked at how shoddy it was and that a member of the gaming press was essentially lashing out at gamers (at the time, I didn't understand why). If they spent nearly as much time questioning Anita and Zoe as they did their target audience, it might not appear so bad.

I had already read that particular article. Yeah, it's heavy-handed but I get where it's coming from. I was writing a thing just yesterday about an entirely different subject but wanted to use the Nintendo DS as part of an analogy and, once the piece was finished, I found I had to go in and edit out the word 'gamer' because it now has negative connotations.

Like I said, this isn't new. You can see it in far more laughable subjects than these, such as how people who play mobile games aren't real gamers or how people who don't import and struggle through JRPGs aren't real gamers. It's a little elitist bubble that becomes dangerous when it perceives a threat. Like a little terrier backed into a corner. Except what is causing that perception of threat is often just - hey, other people like to play games too. But a lot of gamers don't like this idea one bit.

As for the rest of it, no need to go into it. It has all been well covered elsewhere and you've either not read it or you have read it having gone in looking to dismiss it. Of course you found reasons to render her videos completely invalid. How could you not? To do anything else might mean you have to reevaluate how you approach your hobby. Of course gamers "loathe" this woman (nice!) - it seems they (we?) are a fragile bunch.

What I don't understand is why the man children of the internet are so threatened by women who have an opinion about video games. Do they really think that a feminist critique of video gaming is suddenly going to make all the anime fan service games and bro shooters disappear? As long as these games continue to sell, they will continue to be made, regardless of who criticizes them. Everyone is entitled to their opinions and their opinions do not prevent anyone from enjoying video games. If you like your video games, please continue to like your video games. Someone else not liking or even criticizing your video games does not prevent you from enjoying them and singing their praises. Promote what you like. Ignore what you don't. Be happy.

Everyone has their biases. I think you're going out of your way to generalize a lot here, much like the anti-gaming articles that have popped up are. In the case of mobile games (and Facebook games), people see them as cheaply made cash-ins and generally see them as garbage. Sadly, that has been prevalent over the years. Look at how quickly those games die out if they become popular. I seem to recall Candy Crush Saga being hot stuff several months ago, their publisher just posted massive losses because people stopped playing the games. Remember the videogame crash of 1983, when the market was flooded with subpar games and systems (Atari 5200)? That is exactly what mobile games remind me of.

Are you really going to tell me the film industry is that much different? Or how about the music industry? I argue with people about what type of metal is good and isn't good all the time...It comes and goes with the hobby. Even pro wrestling vs the sports entertainment of today (which old school pro wrestling fans HATE). What you described exists in EVERY hobby. I find the diversity refreshing, to be honest, even if I hate the other side completely.

Come on man, I just typed up Anita's entire gaming biography in a small handful of sentences. You can't even muster up a hint of criticism or skepticism? It doesn't seem the least bit fishy to you?

You're right, I'm new to this crap and I know a con artist when I see it. Anita literally checks every single box. I also have virtually no loyalty to modern games, so I'm more than willing to accept VALID criticism. Getting paid $160,000 to say men are turned on by dead, half-naked women in advertising is not what I regard as valid.

Try this article. It's by a feminist gamer and I think it covers both sides very well and very fairly. It's just...good writing:

http://angelwitchpaganheart.wordpress.c … gamergate/

Why should I care? She's entitled to her opinion, and she can say whatever she wants. Her opinions do not affect my ability to enjoy my hobby. I'd rather talk about all the great games I'm playing now and looking forward to in the future.

Xlord, it has nothing to do with a woman having an opinion (people would be responding the same way if it was a guy offering the same poor quality of criticism). The problem I have is the coverage by the gaming media and immediately assuming Anita is above questioning, while attacking their TARGET AUDIENCE (videogames) without a second thought. It just smells of agenda.

I wasn't asking you, I was asking Jay. For what it's worth, Anita's shoddy critiques HAVE gotten the attention of several developers and apparently she has won awards for them. That's not a good thing when you're trying to argue that men are turned on by having half naked dead women in advertisements!

Me personally, I care because I originally went to school for journalism and while the gaming media has always been somewhat of a joke, it's really rubbing me the wrong way this time. I have commented in the past about the tone and quality of writing in various magazines, this really isn't much different.

To answer your question, you want it to sound fishy. And it's so typical of what is going on that you say it allows you to dismiss everything as "completely invalid" regardless of whether or not there are actually valid points here. This piece resonated with me on some of those topics: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/imortal/20 … deo-games/

As for a comparison with your heavy metal scene arguments, got to hold my hands up and say I don't know how things work there. Do people sharing views result in death and rape threats there too?

And you seem to want to believe everything the woman says is law much like the current gaming media, so I'm wasting my time talking to you about it.

That's mildly amusing you chose to cherry pick that out of what I said. Actually no, the discussions I have with other fans are usually quite pleasant. Maybe you have the same sad negative image of heavy metal music just as you seem to have for gaming?

And just for the record: NO ONE ON EITHER SIDE IS CONDONING THE DEATH OR RAPE THREATS! But it's not "all gamers" doing it either.

No, I don't have the same sad image of heavy metal which is why I asked. I would have been very surprised if death and rape threats are part of those other fan cultures. And yet they are in gaming which reveals a twisted level of defensive irrational anger. And among those not issuing the threats, I have seen a massive amount of victim-blaming and deflection which only validates such behaviour, whether outright condoning it or not. Bottom line is: it's ugly. And as a Maiden fan, I'm encouraged to hear that isn't part of the metal scene.

I don't consider it a part of videogame culture either, when it is a small minority doing it. Tiny, tiny, tiny percentage. People in the spotlight get death threats, that's just how society works. And sadly, yes, some people do get off on them and the attention they bring (me personally, I feel that doesn't apply to Zoe but could possibly apply to Anita...just wild guesses) Most of them are not credible ones either. It's certainly a part of political culture when an event happens (the recent Ferguson shooting as an example) and even sports, when there's a goat and the hometown fans are upset. But I think you have to be pretty damn jaded to call it a part of videogame culture.

If it were just one or two crazies with everyone else condemning those crazies, I'd agree. But it's not. Combined with the widespread victim-blaming, angry dismissals of the targets, and any and every loud shouting down of anyone who questions an aspect of gaming (especially when that person is a woman), I would say it is very much a part of videogame culture.

That type of attitude is far more dangerous for those of us that play videogames than a small handful of crazies (or 12 year olds on Xbox Live) who may be sending death threats. THAT'S why I am upset about it.

Pretty good take on the matter. He addresses the death threats pretty well at 9:40.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBmifFUBmg8

And no, it was nothing to do with her being a woman. Sorry. No.

My attitude is dangerous? More than facilitating threats? Really?

In other news, Jenn Frank has been harassed out of the industry. Seems the threats did that, rather than my dangerous attitude that the threats and those facilitating them are wrong.

Well, you're trying to lump death threats in with videogame culture. That is irresponsible and stereotypical, if not outright hate-driven. That IS an attack, whether you realize it or not. Does that go for me? Does that go for everyone else on this board that plays games? Think how flawed that line of thinking is on a higher level. THAT is what scares me about this debacle.

I just got done telling you death threats happen to known people, for various reasons. It's. Not. Just. Videogames.

Edit: Here's what I think of when I think of gamer culture:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsZELoI33T4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u83LQ5G5kpE

Just away from my computer for a bit and my phone reception is awful but I will check those videos later. They may well affect my perception of what you've written so I'll edit later if they do. Until then though, it feels like another deflection. Gamers are doing this and gamers have to own responsibility, me included. It's crazy to me that you're using words like 'scare' and 'dangerous' about the view that the threats are not cool and are indicative of a problem rather than about the problem itself. Deflects from the problem which in turn enables them. So yes, I lump a lot of people in with this.

To be honest, whether right or wrong (and I SO hope I was wrong) I lumped you in with this when you began this discussion not by saying how awful it is that people have been attacked and threatened and what can we do about it but instead began by saying your gaming was being attacked by these awful women and their supporters.

Edit: Finally watched those videos. It's great that things like that are what game culture mean to you and there's good stuff there obviously but unfortunately our own individual takes don't get to dictate what game culture actually is, includes or entail. No more than I could join the KKK and argue it's all about awesome headwear even if that's the main reason I loved it.

It's amazing how out of touch I can be--and how blissful ignorance truly is. Up until a day or two ago I had absolutely no knowledge of the Zoe Quinn controversy or the #GamerGate that ensued. As someone who doesn't follow Twitter, 4chan, or any major gaming site, I completely missed this. At first it all seemed laughable but there's too many nuances to just summarily dismiss.

I have to say that in the broadest of senses, I agree with the notion that painting all gamers as monstrous people isn't totally kosher--just as painting all professional athletes as juiced-up homophobic spouse-absusers would also be disingenuous. At the same time, it's just downright deluded to assert that those aren't problems in those industries--even if the offenders make up "the minority," it's still too large a group to ignore.

I also think there's as much room to talk about gaming journalism/industry corruption as much as there is institutionalized bigotry. But I also think that torches and pitchforks shouldn't be brandished based on what's little more than biased hearsay from someone who clearly had a vendetta for revenge (Quinn's ex). Incidentally, my solution when encountering biased or corrupt (and/or simply unappealing) media has been surprisingly simple and effective: if I don't like it, I just stop consuming. Evidently, compared against those who continually consume it in order to pick it apart and justify diatribes, I'm happier for it.

Honestly, Goldfish, I was with you--in the broadest senses as outlined above. But as others have already pointed out, a lot of your specifics are symptomatic of the mindset you're trying to dismiss as being a "tiny, tiny percentage." For me personally, it was when you asserted that Sarkeesian "probably gets off" on death threats. That's not just a harmless "wild guess"--it's a baseless and tasteless accusation and just plain insensitive, to put it kindly. You don't know her well enough to make such a "guess"--it's not really something you should guess about in any case--and you've obviously never dealt with a death threat yourself. Still, that's not to say that you're categorically among the truly disgusting ranks of the hobby collective; instead, though, I think it illustrates that their influence can affect those who consider themselves "one of the good guys" more than they think/are aware of.

Holy hell did this topic explode. Not touching anything with a ten foot poll, except...

I'm surprised the authorities cared. I mean it's Hudson Soft... they're still around...?

Was gonna make my own post regarding this whole thing, but this guy nails it far harder than I ever could.

The video is about the Street Fighter X Tekken controversy, but I feel that it's overall message is relevant to this discussion as well.

Funny you should mention that. In the military, they shout at you like that to motivate you, especially during training. They will say whatever they have to, to piss you off enough, to get you to do what they want you to. That's just the way it works.

I think us guys can be pretty rough sometimes. We berate and ridicule each other, and this has been true when either playing sports or games, but I don't think we really mean it. We just like to come off tough. And when women come into the equation, we treat them the same way we treat other guys. We're not treating them badly because they're women, we're treating them as equals, the same way we men treat each other.

Gaming isn't about promoting violence or sex, but it's about problem-solving, strategic thinking, and goal-orientatedness - things which lend themselves to traditionally masculine traits, and aggressiveness - not aggressiveness in the beat everybody up sort of a way - but aggressiveness in the sense of goal-getting.

Well, can we all at least agree that Pong isn't sexist? Or is it assumed that the balls and paddles are both male? Wait, if the paddles are female, and they're knocking around the male balls, doesn't that actually make the game misandric (opposite of misogynistic)? Yes, I'm attempting some form of sarcastic/sardonic humor.

I've noticed a lot of articles spouting feminist propaganda on multiple gaming news sites, that don't even talk about video games.

Maybe this's why I've gotten tired of the hobby?

A lot of the press associated with it has become just politically correct brain washing.

Second that! Hudson Soft always came off to me as one of those creepy off-brand video game producers. Them, and Sun Soft.

Looking through my old collection, everything's basically: Capcom, Konami, Squaresoft, or Nintendo (first party).

The bottom line for me in this controversy is the following:

-Harassment of any kind is NEVER justified for any reason
-All people have a right to their opinions whether we agree with them or not
-Journalists have a responsibility to be open and honest with their audience and disclose any potential conflicts of interest
-No one is above criticism, but criticism should never devolve into harassment

To Goldfish, just because death threats happen to public facing people does not make them ok. They are never ok, regardless of how famous a person may be. Saying "this is the world we live in" is a cop out. People get away with that sort of behavior because the silent majority allows them to. We're never going to be able to make all people act like decent human beings, but we can make it clear that we won't turn a blind eye to that sort of disgusting behavior. If we want the world we live in to be less disgusting, we have to do our part in making it less disgusting.

In gaming terms, that means making it clear that normal, well adjusted people that enjoy video games want nothing to do with GamerGate or whatever they are calling their sick harassment campaign. There's a very distinct difference between writing articles demanding that journalists be open and honest and harassing people. The two need to be separated. The idea that journalists need to be open and honest is a very good one, but no one will take the idea seriously if it's being driven by harassment instead of civil discussion.

Sorry, I need to break this up a bit:

Guys, can you PLEASE get off your high horse about this? Go look back at post #19 from me:

"And just for the record: NO ONE ON EITHER SIDE IS CONDONING THE DEATH OR RAPE THREATS!"

This is common sense, this should not be the main takeaway from this issue on your end, it should be a given. I was getting a headache talking to Jay last night because he going on and on about this. YES, HARASSMENT IS WRONG! YES, DEATH THREATS ARE WRONG! NO, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM BEING WOMEN! NO, THIS ISSUE DOES NOT EXIST BECAUSE OF THE HARASSMENT! In fact, I am not even interested in Zoe or Anita at this point because they are not what drew me into the issue. My issue is the (irony alert) harassment of the press on gamers and lumping EVERYONE in with tiny minority that are causing issues for people.

Now I know one of you are going to say, "But Goldfish, you said you condone it earlier...Go look at post #21 that you wrote". Here are my points:

-It happens. I'm not excusing it, I'm just saying it happens, especially when contacting someone online is as easy as it is. Especially to famous people from all walks of life, from politicians to sports figures. It's. Not. Just. Gamers.
-When it happens and you feel your life is in danger, you call the police and you DON'T post it on social media as both Zoe and Anita did. You file a police report and that report is then public.
-The sad thing is, some people use it for their own benefit and I feel that MAY be the case with these two individuals. People like this are usually manipulative sociopaths and get off on this sort of thing. They DO exist. I hope I'm wrong on this. If they are legit, I hope they arrest and convict whoever is doing it. If they produce a police report, I will happily eat my words. But as of now, I have my skepticism.
-That said, the whole doxxing thing IS dangerous because it remove anonymity. That needs to stop. (this term is new to me, so not sure how often they happen)

Sorry, just need to make that as clear as possible, so someone ELSE doesn't stumble into this thread and post like I'm condoning harassment in general.

This is the main point of Gamergate and why I'm following it, but it's getting lumped in with the harassment bit, so it's losing the message a bit. This is what most of the supporters are focusing on ATM, Zoe and Anita are more or less afterthoughts.

I combined these two because they are related. I agree with both, with two caveats: People can be criticized for their opinion (they should welcome it, in fact, which is why a lot of people cannot take Anita's critiques seriously) and people in positions of power, such as gaming websites need to use their opinions more judiciously than they have been.

Just need to clear this up, because you're incorrect here...Gamergate is NOT about harassing people, it is about cleaning up game journalism, holding it to higher standards and sniffing out underlying political agendas and it originated from the 10 or so articles that hit just prior to PAX, essentially sending a message that "gamers are dead and gamers are bad people". That sparked the fire and that's why some of us are good and pissed off right now.

More or less, this is my entire argument here: http://www.slate.com/articles/technolog … _they.html

Have you read this: http://sydlexia.com/pong.htm. haha. His Pac-Man nihilism article is still God-tier out of all similarly humorous "meaning of game" articles.

May just rename this thread "The History of Outcries of Sexism in VideoGames". My experience of where I first encountered this stuff was in a magazine of EGM which had an indifferent comment to the social ramifications of having booth babes at E3. If only they had known how profitable it would be to scream out about sexism they would still be in business. hur hur.

Haven't seen this posted here but this is the picture that perfectly defines game journalism: http://i.imgur.com/kLHUo.png

The current issue isn't sexism though.

Edit: 11:50 and on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0qr2qhctV4

Goldfish, the gaming media might retort "the current issue isn't journalistic integrity though." Does that make it so? A called out B on their bull, and B called out A on theirs (as most recently demonstrated when A called out B).. This isn't turn-based combat; you can't dismiss an entire topic because "it's not what I'm talking about right now." The truth is they're both current issues; some people on both sides would rather address one and ignore the other.

For being "not even interested" in Quinn and Sarkeesian, you were the one who really introduced them here; not only that, you painted their deeds negatively, particularly insinuating the latter's ineligibility by citing her as a "non-gamer," calling her credentials into question (I suppose that her education and research, including her master's thesis on women science fiction and fantasy, is also totally irrelevant to what she's set out to do). Incidentally, part of the whole "death of The Gamer" angle was that "Gamers" see themselves as an insular hardcore group who resents anyone who are "non-gamers," "casuals," etc as a threat to the state of their hobby... something you demonstrated by fussing over whether or not Sarkeesian is a real gamer. You thought Jay was overgeneralizing, but by harping on Sarkeesian's gamer cred, you're showing that there's some merit to gaming media's assertions.

Sometimes, it takes an outsider to shine a light on a given scene, because the insiders are blind to its problems--they either aren't aware it exists or don't want to be. I'll admit that Sarkeesian entered the scene with what felt like confirmation bias, but if outsiders see something the insiders can't, I think that says more about the insiders than anything else.

Sarkeesian did report the threats to the authorities and made it very clear why she shared the threat publicly. As someone who is very critical of her actions and intents (despite being "not even interested"), I'm surprised you overlooked these details when accusing Sarkeesian of doing the opposite. If I wanted to criticize somebody for not doing something, I'd... you know, check to see if they did or didn't do it first. I'd say everyone's entitled to their opinion, but if you're not even going to bother looking up some basic information before asserting "speculation" to the contrary, maybe you just shouldn't say anything. Definitely don't paint them as "manipulative sociopaths"... the phrase "MAY be" doesn't absolve you from what you're getting at. I suppose that her own words aren't enough for you, hence demanding a police report be produced. It's a little amusing that right after you demand that, you remark about how we need to protect privacy.

I'm sorry, are you now suggesting that the threats might not even been real? Despite your assertion about what this movement is/isn't about, I think that when you baselessly accuse people of making things up, make claims without any logical or informational basis, and otherwise explain away anything semi-valid about them, you don't help your "journalistic integrity" movement. You want to hold somebody to a higher standard? I know where you can start.