Zoe Quinn as told by Internet Aristocrat; thoughts?
  • Anita embezzles $160,000.00 dollars? 
  • This whole thing has evolved to the point where it's become utterly impossible to keep track of and I've seen a few people publicly say they're giving up on writing about games altogether.  Somewhere in the middle of all of this is a desire by consumers who feel very strongly (possibly too strongly?) about their favourite medium to hold those who influence opinion and earn a living from delivering games-related coverage up to the highest possible standards.  How that has translated into unspeakable misogyny and death-threats, I'm not quite sure, but I kind of wish it all could have been done without so much drama and what feels like long-term fallout.

    I read this over lunch today, which is quite an old article at this point but which I was unaware of at the time.  I wanted to share it here, but short of creating another separate '#Gamergate' thread (and I'm fucked if I'm doing that), I couldn't think where else to stick it:  http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-07-16-blurred-lines-are-youtubers-breaking-the-law
  • I get that the guy in that Slate article is arguing that it's more that the gaming press is dying than the notion of 'Gamers' as a group, and he's probably not wrong.  I've said it a couple of times, but other than a few rare exceptions, I'd rather the term 'Game Journalist' went away, if nothing else.

    He argues that the websites are selling their 'Gamer' audience to PR firms, but that doesn't tell us anything about the health or otherwise of that demographic - firms outside the fishbowl of Games (which is who the website is presumably pitching themselves to) are bound to be unaware of any shifts in that type of distinction, at least for a little while.

    What's more worrying is his blind statement about the role of 'enthusiast press':


    I'd argue that the principle reason that companies are reaching out to these people is not because of their relationship with their audience (there's plenty of gaming sites that have managed to maintain that, in spite of all the recent hoo-hah) but because (as dudes talking to a camera in their bedroom who dream of making a living from this stuff) they're far easier to influence and have far less scrutiny exerted upon them in terms of the quality and independence of their coverage.  

    I'm not just saying this based on the article I posted above either - Nintendo got a lot of traction with the 3DS and Wii by engaging with Mommy bloggers and enthusiasts, and that was years ago.  Heck, even at the company where I work, we were talking about the influence that prominent lay press and amateur columnists might have on the future of our market (especially relevant to us as the nature of our business means we're not allowed to contact them in general) 2 years ago - and even at that point we were massively behind the times!
  • God in Heaven these folks take this way to seriously. I think I know why. Games are entertainment. Everyone knows that entertainment reporters are in bed with the entertainment industry. Movie reporters are there to sell movies. Game reporters are there to SELL games. This is not reporting of world events or political policy. It is not that important.

    Some gamers get confused because they spend all their time in virtual worlds. It is entertainment as identity. It does not matter if this is your world. It is not the real world. It only exists because someone is making money. A big part of how that money is made is marketing. The reporters exist as a part of that marketing.

    Hell, that marketing can even work in reverse. Why does Peter Travers give an absurd number of movies great reviews? It is so his blurb is on more posters than anyone, with the title of his magazine, Rolling Stone. Rolling Stone uses copious "good" reviews to puts its name where people will see it.

    Getting indignant about gaming journalism standards is like getting upset that a whore stole your money. What did you expect? You clearly did not understand the actual game being played.

    The aristocrat is a pompous prude. This ain't the New York Times, this is Variety. Going on and on about a woman having sex with possibly five guys makes you sound like you have not been laid in living memory. Who the heck cares? She's mean. She uses sex for her benefit. Do you think she is the first person to do that? Do you think she is the billionth? This is beyond first world problems. This is virtual world problems. It is sad and strange that some folks have gotten so angry they wish physical harm on others. I feel like the doctor is Fight Club, telling the protagonist to go see actual suffering, just to get his bearings.
    Noobied by 1Littleg
  • I think the overblown reaction to Zoe's alleged indiscretions has less to do with Zoe herself than it does the on-going misrepresenting and slamming of gaming and gamers by sections of the games media. I’m content enough to leave that particular mud-slinging contest to the more invested among us and get on with the business of enjoying my videogames...though I'd be open to the possibility of supporting Ms Quinn in exchange for a quick handie.
  • Just read the Vox piece, it's everything anyone would need to know: http://www.vox.com/2014/9/6/6111065/gamergate-explained-everybody-fighting
  • It's been fun watching this from afar and basking in the golden rays of fuckery. Explaining this nonsense to anyone in my life who isn't a gamer has been best summed up by telling them to imagine two homeless people fighting over an empty cup of coffee. I guess once it all blows over in a couple days I can get the same enjoyment by going back to following modern politics.
    Noobied by 1shozaya
  • I think the most interesting part of this whole fiasco has been the level of influence Zoe has had in shutting down discussion of this event on the various mainstream gaming sites.  I've been keeping up to date on the amazing clusterfuck in reddit's /r/gaming with various mods deleting and shadowbanning anyone that tried to discuss it, right after Zoe contacted one of the admins via twitter.  There have been a large number of screencapped chatlogs (search around) that belies a well orchestrated PR counter blitz which is actually kind of impressive.  On the other hand, it's quite ironic to see it completely backfire with a mega-Streisand effect by getting people more riled up about the censorship and coverups than the original issue in the first place.

    All in all, the entire issue of sexism in media has had a long history from books, music, movies, and television.  It's only natural for it to come to games now that it's outgrown it's adolescence and has matured into a massive industry.  I tend to agree in principle with a lot of the tenets of the movement like needing more gender/sex diversity in the game development.  But I passionately disagree with the current trends of gaming sites publishing non-stop SJW op-ed pieces calling out developers on relatively tame issues and blowing them completely out of proportion.  The amount of flack that Ubisoft got for lack of female assassins seemed particularly unnecessary.  I also hate the latest batch of articles from gaming websites attacking gamers themselves (see Epke's link for details http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/09/gamergate_explodes_gaming_journalists_declare_the_gamers_are_over_but_they.html).  Not all gamers are straight white males aiming to oppress all other races/women/orientations, and frankly I'm getting tired of being told what I should like and dislike by folks trying to take the moral high ground.

    IMHO, the best way to fix a lot of the core issues is to continue expanding the gaming audience and game developer scene to include as many different kinds of people we can.  Making game development as easy as possible is key.  So is making sure you buy/kickstart/greenlight as many weird, off-the-wall indie games you can.  Positive reinforcement is 10X stronger than negative reinforcement.  It's sad that negative reinforcement seems to be the tactic du juor these days.


  • Totally agree @Yuzo but isn't it why the Noobtoob podcast was started? The incestual relation between the gaming industry and the gaming sites was so obvious with the strange scores and the overly hyping off some games, The noobtoob podcast gave and honest although biased xbox fanboy :P reviews (that last bit was a joke or was it? ;))
  • @Epke Funny enough, we actually talk a bit about our history with preferring Xbox in the past and how that's changed completely recently in the latest ep :).
  • Man, this thing refuses to die.  Now reviewtechusa has gone down the rabbit hole.  It is a perfect illustration of the situation that he had to put up a video denouncing violence.  It is bizarre that gamergaters constantly state that the threats to women are fraudulent... when the comments below the videos are basically surfing the edge of what mods will allow in violent, anti-women statements.

    Gaming journalism was always a fig leaf for this thing.  It started at slut shaming and rapidly went to threats.  There is a segment of the gaming community determined to live down the stereotype that they resent.  They are too stupid to see the irony.  Saying somebody is a feminazi because they do not like being called a bitch so stupid it makes my teeth hurt.
  • This is years of feminist bullshit finally coming back to bite them in the ass. If you're happy to be thought of as not only a Nigel-no-friends, but now a misogynist to boot, because of your hobby, more power to ya, but I won't be tarred with the same brush. If you can't see the point the Gamergate people are making, and if you defend total scum the likes of Zoe or Anita, it's you who's down the rabbit hole.
  • There's no point to the Gamergate thing at it's core. They say it's about ethics, but not a single person Zoe is accused of sleeping with even reviewed her game. So it's a red herring. It'd be one thing if they all gave her game 10/10 and told everyone to buy it, but nobody did. When you realize that, the entire argument falls on its own ass because they have nothing to stand on.
  • Yeah, if you are threatened by Sweden spending 40K (nothing) on gender diversity, then you are very easily threatened.
  • Wait, at this point, I'm confused, because I've tried not to pay too much attention to it all.  What is all this drama all about, if this is years of feminist bullshit biting people on the arse?  Feminism?  Collusion between a developer and a games writer?  Misrepresentation of 'Gamers' as a social group?  Or is it really actually all about ethics in video games journalism?

    As a wise man said on Twitter the other day "Internet Debates : When Echo Chambers Collide!!" and my personal echo chamber seems very anti-GG (whatever that represents) so I couldn't honestly pretend to offer a balanced opinion on the whole deal.
  • At this point, it appears to be a dispute between folks who would like to see more diversity in female roles in games and/or find the threatening and stalking of women unacceptable;  and folks who find said desire for diversity so threatening that they threaten and dox women who hold that view, or at least abide the threats and bizarrely hateful language lavished on said women by others on their side.  Well, it is not so much a dispute as a group that runs a hate mob for a bit a profit, and the people who know that threatening women is wrong.
  • -Threatening women is wrong.
    -Threatening people because you disagree with them is wrong.
    -Cheating on a significant other is wrong.
    -Having no journalistic integrity is wrong.
    -Stigmatizing an entire group of people is wrong.
    -Failing to give an accurate portrayal of an art form because you have an agenda is wrong.
    -Taking sides when you don't know all the facts/have a skewed perception is wrong.

    At the end of the day, everyone involved on either side of Gamer Gate is objectively wrong, and I find it best to try and stay away from the whole thing.
  • The threats to women are way beyond any of the other issues. Many folks on the gg side either ignore them or actually deny them. It is quite simply unconscionable.

Howdy, Stranger!


In this Discussion

Most Popular This Week