• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 04:49
CEST 10:49
KST 17:49
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202557RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings What tournaments are world championships? RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? [G] Mineral Boosting Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Post Pic of your Favorite Food! Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 900 users

Gamergate and video game journalism - Page 27

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 25 26 27 28 29 31 Next All
Please don't go calling people racist, misogynists, or any combination therein. Don't start throwing around words like "white Knight" or SJW, these words are at this point used in a derogatory manner regarding this debate. You can discuss that these terms exist, but do not attribute them to any individual user or group of users on this website.

Try to have a serious discussion about the topic at hand without resorting to personal attacks and we will all be the better for it. Breaking this rule will result in an automatic temp ban the length of which will depend on the comment you make.

This thread started not so bad. It is getting worse. If you want to have this discussion on TL be respectful of your fellow users, we all live in the same house.

Effective now: Page 21 October 18th 08:31 KST
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
October 18 2014 18:34 GMT
#521
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.
Average means I'm better than half of you.
Dunnobro
Profile Joined October 2014
United States67 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-10-18 18:36:18
October 18 2014 18:34 GMT
#522
Real talk Anita is neither connected to gamergate and is only a subject for gaming journalists. She isn't apart of the problem and certainly not worth the few but undeniable pages we've given her here.

I'm going to ignore all LW related posts unrelated to gamergate here from now on, I suggest if anyone actually cares they do the same.

Remember what Prof. Oak says, "There's a time and place for everything, but are you a girl or boy?"

Or something like that. Never actually played pokemon.
ZeromuS
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Canada13389 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-10-18 18:42:22
October 18 2014 18:36 GMT
#523
On October 19 2014 03:19 Dunnobro wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:14 ZeromuS wrote:

At its core, there are problematic representations of women in gaming - this cannot be argued as false.


It can actually, though it focuses on what denotes "problematic" rather than what's going on in gaming, and how there's lots of other potential "problematic" views if you use the same criteria to determine it's an issue for women alone. And that's entirely unrelated to #gamergate so I'm steering clear of that.


Well yes, of course, you can find analogues across the genders, but we need to remember that from the perspective of a critique, it needs to be focused. You can't argue every "negative" presentation of a human being in every game.

From the position of looking at the over sexualisation of women in gaming and their dis-empowerment then you can find that in spades. If your point is to examine that specifically then you can do that. Just because a men are presented as ultimate killing machines as a protagonist or meat shield fodder for enemies. The fact this exists doesn't invalidate the former as a critique.

Thats the one thing a lot of people seem to gloss over. This isn't a hard science, the opposite of one thing does not invalidate the other. They can both coexist. Strong female leads can coexist with weak females treated as objects. Both exist, and thats OK (from the perspective of having a discussion and discourse). But if I want to talk about how the latter is more common than the former I can do so, and its entirely valid.

And the definition of problematic is shaped by the position taken by the person claiming a problematic. Now you need to prove its problematic and if you make vast all encompassing claims that all women in gaming are being hurt by men and that all women are presented simply as objects could be disproved. But only when you make such wild claims that they apply as an absolute across every possible situation do you come into that kind of situation.

On October 19 2014 03:34 Dunnobro wrote:
Real talk Anita is neither connected to gamergate and is only a subject for gaming journalists. She isn't apart of the problem and certainly not worth the few but undeniable pages we've given her here.

I'm going to ignore all LW related posts unrelated to gamergate here from now on, I suggest if anyone actually cares they do the same.

Remember what Prof. Oak says, "There's a time and place for everything, but are you a girl or boy?"

Or something like that. Never actually played pokemon.


This is true, I was trying to shut the door on it but might only be making things worse

If it derails the thread too much and others agree (PM me or post in here) we can limit the discussion to the issue of journalism in gaming.

However, that itself is difficult because the issue of gender is associated with the issue of journalistic integrity because of the history of the evolution of the debate surrounding it (beginning with the whole Zoe Quinn crap).

This is what confuses me so much about "gamergate" (hate the term btw).

How can anyone be against the notion of trying to apply journalistic integrity to the gaming press?
StrategyRTS forever | @ZeromuS_plays | www.twitch.tv/Zeromus_
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
October 18 2014 18:38 GMT
#524
On October 19 2014 03:34 Dunnobro wrote:
Real talk Anita is neither connected to gamergate and is only a subject for gaming journalists. She isn't apart of the problem and certainly not worth the few but undeniable pages we've given her here.

I'm going to ignore all LW related posts unrelated to gamergate here from now on, I suggest if anyone actually cares they do the same.

Remember what Prof. Oak says, "There's a time and place for everything, but are you a girl or boy?"

Or something like that. Never actually played pokemon.


Well, what she does is interesting to talk about at the very least, and off-topic derailing is kind of the norm for forum threads.

Although, she's relevant in that a lot of game writers seem to frequent her conferences and talks, for whatever reasons.
Average means I'm better than half of you.
Trumpet
Profile Blog Joined October 2007
United States1935 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-10-18 18:43:16
October 18 2014 18:41 GMT
#525
Just to give some perspective because this "just make your own games" "boycott the bad ones" thing is being said a lot... I don't think many feminists are calling for boycotts of games with bad elements. Most I see are trying to raise awareness about the issues in them so the developers can address is better next time around.

Stuff like this from the creative director of Volition, company that made Saints Row:


"I think it's fair to be called out on your shit," he told The Escapist.

"I think that it's a sad man that can never be self-reflective. I think that we tried to go and carry ourselves with respect, and try to respect sexuality and respect gender as much as we can, and sometimes we fail but hopefully we'll do better and continue to get better."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-09-02-volition

On October 19 2014 03:34 Dunnobro wrote:
Or something like that. Never actually played pokemon.


A smasher that didn't play pokemon? Well now I've seen everything
Xiphos
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
Canada7507 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-10-18 18:43:22
October 18 2014 18:41 GMT
#526
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

2014 - ᕙ( •̀ل͜•́) ϡ Raise your bows brood warriors! ᕙ( •̀ل͜•́) ϡ
ZeromuS
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Canada13389 Posts
October 18 2014 18:46 GMT
#527
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?

As I have said before: her description of issues regarding the issues of the female gender and gaming should not be debated by discussing any perceived lack of ethics.
StrategyRTS forever | @ZeromuS_plays | www.twitch.tv/Zeromus_
ninazerg
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
United States7291 Posts
October 18 2014 18:50 GMT
#528
On October 18 2014 09:26 Defacer wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 18 2014 07:48 Xiphos wrote:

Not a metaphor, its what actually happened.

People bought in on her ideal that games are sexists (this is called brainwashing) even though it have been debunked numerous times by YouTubers.

If you would read the thread, you would definitely find the evidence not too far from here. Go to pg 19.

.


Do you understand what a metaphor or a simile is? Do you realize that people agreeing with one position or another doesn't constitute brainwashing? And that you're using the 'term' brainwashing as a metaphor in this instance?

I'm trying to fair and patient here, I really am.

Anyway images such as this don't prove or disprove anything.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BwJNnfUCAAA9VrZ.jpg

"not logged in"


I've been thinking about this and I realized it would be easier to just paint over sensitive information rather than copy/paste a blank header over the real header and align it correctly. That's why I think it was probably not doctored.



"screen cap taken 12s after last tweet"

So what? Did you know that if you take a screen cap 12s after something happens, time moves forward in a linear fashion? That means a five, ten, fifteen minutes or a WHOLE DAY can go by and the screen cap will still say 12s! HOLY SHIT! Is Anita a time lord?


If someone were a time lord, there would be no way to know, so it is possible that Anita Sarkeesian might hypothetically be a time lord, but I find this to be highly unlikely. I know this has also been pointed out, but twitter automatically updates the time stamps on posts. So if you do a screen cap 12 seconds after a tweet, the tweet will still update its time-stamp, but the actual screen capture image will only capture the activity on the screen at the time it was taken. This means that the person who took the screen capture made the tweet and immediately did a screen cap.
"If two pregnant women get into a fist fight, it's like a mecha-battle between two unborn babies." - Fyodor Dostoevsky
Dunnobro
Profile Joined October 2014
United States67 Posts
October 18 2014 18:51 GMT
#529
People did post that video xiphos, I did and so did someone else lol This is why I feel like we're going in circles...
sevencck
Profile Joined August 2011
Canada704 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-10-18 18:52:16
October 18 2014 18:51 GMT
#530
On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?


I certainly agree with you here, but shouldn't the same logic apply to the gaming world? Choose which companies and which products you want to associate with, and if you don't want to you don't need to? Shouldn't we apply the same judgement about questioning the ethics and marketing of gaming companies trying to sell a product?

If Sarkeesian's work is to be respected by invoking choice, why shouldn't that apply equally to the broader gaming world?
I like to think that the moon is there even if I am not looking at it. -Albert Einstein
Millitron
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States2611 Posts
October 18 2014 18:52 GMT
#531
On October 19 2014 03:41 Trumpet wrote:
Just to give some perspective because this "just make your own games" "boycott the bad ones" thing is being said a lot... I don't think many feminists are calling for boycotts of games with bad elements. Most I see are trying to raise awareness about the issues in them so the developers can address is better next time around.

Stuff like this from the creative director of Volition, company that made Saints Row:
https://twitter.com/SteveJaros/status/504227522423185409

Show nested quote +
"I think it's fair to be called out on your shit," he told The Escapist.

"I think that it's a sad man that can never be self-reflective. I think that we tried to go and carry ourselves with respect, and try to respect sexuality and respect gender as much as we can, and sometimes we fail but hopefully we'll do better and continue to get better."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-09-02-volition

Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:34 Dunnobro wrote:
Or something like that. Never actually played pokemon.


A smasher that didn't play pokemon? Well now I've seen everything

They are raising awareness about a problem only they see in an industry they have no interest in. It's ridiculous that people pay any attention to what Sarkeesian and others like her say. They don't even play the genre's of videogames they complain about. It reminds me of Piers Morgan's many tirades against gun ownership in the US. He's a British citizen and lives in the UK, yet all he ever did when he still had his show on MSNBC was yell about how guns are evil. He had no interest in the US, and still believed his opinion on how the country should be run mattered.
Who called in the fleet?
Xiphos
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
Canada7507 Posts
October 18 2014 18:55 GMT
#532
On October 19 2014 03:51 Dunnobro wrote:
People did post that video xiphos, I did and so did someone else lol This is why I feel like we're going in circles...


Ah I see

On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?

As I have said before: her description of issues regarding the issues of the female gender and gaming should not be debated by discussing any perceived lack of ethics.


Ethos, Pathos and Logos.

The 3 Triad of convincing others.

She used ethos to say that she is gaming expect = disproved.

She used logos to say that there are some patriarchal society being misogynistic = disproved with that video.

And most importantly, she rallied a whole bunch of people against the gaming industry. Its only natural to push back against that.
2014 - ᕙ( •̀ل͜•́) ϡ Raise your bows brood warriors! ᕙ( •̀ل͜•́) ϡ
Dunnobro
Profile Joined October 2014
United States67 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-10-18 18:55:53
October 18 2014 18:55 GMT
#533
Edit: agh got roped in again. nope nope nope
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
October 18 2014 18:56 GMT
#534
On October 19 2014 03:41 Trumpet wrote:
Just to give some perspective because this "just make your own games" "boycott the bad ones" thing is being said a lot... I don't think many feminists are calling for boycotts of games with bad elements. Most I see are trying to raise awareness about the issues in them so the developers can address is better next time around.

Stuff like this from the creative director of Volition, company that made Saints Row:
Show nested quote +
"I think it's fair to be called out on your shit," he told The Escapist.

"I think that it's a sad man that can never be self-reflective. I think that we tried to go and carry ourselves with respect, and try to respect sexuality and respect gender as much as we can, and sometimes we fail but hopefully we'll do better and continue to get better."

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-09-02-volition


That kind of comment from Saints Row staff seems exactly like the kind of thing that people are taking issue with.

Saints Row is a game that's entirely about taking the "gangster" life and pushing it to the most ridiculous extreme. And that happens to involve strippers and hoes. It also involves taking a ball-gagged man and forcing him to pull a pony cart while you gun down dominatrices who are on similar pony carts. It's that kind of game.

So when a creative director of the franchise says things like "we should do better", what does that really mean? I mean, the player character is already extremely customizable, where you can be male, female, fat, old, anorexic, white, black, Asian, purple, metallic gold. And there are a number of female characters in it that are interesting and colourful without existing as eye-candy (I think the latest DLC for SR4 lets you play as Gat and Kenzie, purely because of the popularity of both).

It reminds me a lot of the complaints about Duke Nukem Forever, how it's juvenile, sexist, overly macho...everything that Duke Nukem is expected to be. Of course, it didn't help that the game was poorly made, but there's something silly about asking a game to clean itself up despite being exactly what it's intended to be.
Average means I'm better than half of you.
ZeromuS
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Canada13389 Posts
Last Edited: 2014-10-18 19:07:30
October 18 2014 19:01 GMT
#535
On October 19 2014 03:51 sevencck wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?


I certainly agree with you here, but shouldn't the same logic apply to the gaming world? Choose which companies and which products you want to associate with, and if you don't want to you don't need to? Shouldn't we apply the same judgement about questioning the ethics and marketing of gaming companies trying to sell a product?

If Sarkeesian's work is to be respected by invoking choice, why shouldn't that apply equally to the broader gaming world?


It totally can, but the conversation is about informing individuals to make that choice. I mean if you react to a critique of something with "if you don't like it then leave", well thats not very productive is it? The entire point of entering into debate and discussion is to learn about different viewpoints and trying to understand them so you can come to a conclusion for yourself while being respectful of the other side. If you do not want to take part in a discussion but rather hold your position steadfastly without considering the other you might as well not be discussing and its in that situation where I ask that you just avoid the things/people you don't like.

Please don't apply the "on a soapbox" thing I just mentioned to any sort of youtube shit. By its very nature a video or other form of media which is crafted is intended to be a one way form of communication. These aren't one offs, we didn't ask anyone on this board for only one post or for only one viewpoint. A forum is an interactive medium, so people can discuss and respond to one another. Posing questions to one another, describing perspectives is one thing, but to continually be inflammatory with regards to a personal opinion of one person and their ethical standing (without engaging on a discussion of the core position of said person) is another matter entirely.

My statement you quoted isn't a general application, it was intended as a direct response to Xiphos who is continually drudging up an off topic discussion and who continues to bring up the Anita Sarkeesian thing as a way to invalidate the positions of others through some sort of appeal. He's essentially taking things people say on one topic equating these views to those of Anita Sarkeesian, and then telling people they are wrong because she is a bad person.

This doesn't help the discussion on this board at all. Its akin to when people would call eachother brainwashed in the long ago closed threads on ukraine and russia.

On October 19 2014 03:55 Xiphos wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:51 Dunnobro wrote:
People did post that video xiphos, I did and so did someone else lol This is why I feel like we're going in circles...


Ah I see

Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?

As I have said before: her description of issues regarding the issues of the female gender and gaming should not be debated by discussing any perceived lack of ethics.


Ethos, Pathos and Logos.

The 3 Triad of convincing others.

She used ethos to say that she is gaming expect = disproved.

She used logos to say that there are some patriarchal society being misogynistic = disproved with that video.

And most importantly, she rallied a whole bunch of people against the gaming industry. Its only natural to push back against that.


Right I can understand your concern but as I have said before:

This doesn't matter. People in this thread aren't saying gaming is evil because Anita said so.

So you can push back all you want against the people who are against gaming and think its evil, but thats not what this thread is about, its not what the discussion is about, and its not fair to continue telling people they are wrong because you are associating their position with a person you dislike.

As an FYI I am extremely, vehemently against the notion that games are inherently bad and that they create bad people. I disagree so much with that premise that I am doing my Master's Thesis as an antithesis to this perspective of gaming. But that doesn't mean I can't also agree that it would be nice to have more strong female protagonists in games and that there is a lot of unnecessary oversexualisation of women in games. At the same time though I can still also recognize that alongside the sexualisation of women in gaming you often find homoerotocism of men and expressions of extreme hegemonic masculinity (Duke Nukem, Gears of War).

I basically want to stop derailing the thread with discussions of ethics of a youtuber when the issue should be ethics of journalists and to a slightly broader extent a discussion of what has been called "gamergate" in general at this point which often comes up.
StrategyRTS forever | @ZeromuS_plays | www.twitch.tv/Zeromus_
Xiphos
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
Canada7507 Posts
October 18 2014 19:06 GMT
#536
On October 19 2014 04:01 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:51 sevencck wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?


I certainly agree with you here, but shouldn't the same logic apply to the gaming world? Choose which companies and which products you want to associate with, and if you don't want to you don't need to? Shouldn't we apply the same judgement about questioning the ethics and marketing of gaming companies trying to sell a product?

If Sarkeesian's work is to be respected by invoking choice, why shouldn't that apply equally to the broader gaming world?


It totally can, but the conversation is about informing individuals to make that choice. I mean if you react to a critique of something with "if you don't like it then leave", well thats not very productive is it? The entire point of entering into debate and discussion is to learn about different viewpoints and trying to understand them so you can come to a conclusion for yourself while being respectful of the other side. If you do not want to take part in a discussion but rather hold your position steadfastly without considering the other you might as well not be discussing and its in that situation where I ask that you just avoid the things/people you don't like.

Please don't apply the "on a soapbox" thing I just mentioned to any sort of youtube shit. By its very nature a video or other form of media which is crafted is intended to be a one way form of communication. These aren't one offs, we didn't ask anyone on this board for only one post or for only one viewpoint. A forum is an interactive medium, so people can discuss and respond to one another. Posing questions to one another, describing perspectives is one thing, but to continually be inflammatory with regards to a personal opinion of one person and their ethical standing (without engaging on a discussion of the core position of said person) is another matter entirely.

My statement you quoted isn't a general application, it was intended as a direct response to Xiphos who is continually drudging up an off topic discussion and who continues to bring up the Anita Sarkeesian thing as a way to invalidate the positions of others through some sort of appeal. He's essentially taking things people say on one topic equating these views to those of Anita Sarkeesian, and then telling people they are wrong because she is a bad person.

This doesn't help the discussion on this board at all. Its akin to when people would call eachother brainwashed in the long ago closed threads on ukraine and russia.


No, I'm not continually bringing Anita Sarkessian, kz w/e ever his name is brought up my posts from pages ago and called me out.

What kind of man am I if I don't stand by my own words?

And I didn't say what kzw w/e his name is representing Anita, everything I brought up is actually attempting to helping her cause by saying:

"Here is the road to what you want, walk on it."
2014 - ᕙ( •̀ل͜•́) ϡ Raise your bows brood warriors! ᕙ( •̀ل͜•́) ϡ
WolfintheSheep
Profile Joined June 2011
Canada14127 Posts
October 18 2014 19:09 GMT
#537
On October 19 2014 04:06 Xiphos wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 04:01 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:51 sevencck wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?


I certainly agree with you here, but shouldn't the same logic apply to the gaming world? Choose which companies and which products you want to associate with, and if you don't want to you don't need to? Shouldn't we apply the same judgement about questioning the ethics and marketing of gaming companies trying to sell a product?

If Sarkeesian's work is to be respected by invoking choice, why shouldn't that apply equally to the broader gaming world?


It totally can, but the conversation is about informing individuals to make that choice. I mean if you react to a critique of something with "if you don't like it then leave", well thats not very productive is it? The entire point of entering into debate and discussion is to learn about different viewpoints and trying to understand them so you can come to a conclusion for yourself while being respectful of the other side. If you do not want to take part in a discussion but rather hold your position steadfastly without considering the other you might as well not be discussing and its in that situation where I ask that you just avoid the things/people you don't like.

Please don't apply the "on a soapbox" thing I just mentioned to any sort of youtube shit. By its very nature a video or other form of media which is crafted is intended to be a one way form of communication. These aren't one offs, we didn't ask anyone on this board for only one post or for only one viewpoint. A forum is an interactive medium, so people can discuss and respond to one another. Posing questions to one another, describing perspectives is one thing, but to continually be inflammatory with regards to a personal opinion of one person and their ethical standing (without engaging on a discussion of the core position of said person) is another matter entirely.

My statement you quoted isn't a general application, it was intended as a direct response to Xiphos who is continually drudging up an off topic discussion and who continues to bring up the Anita Sarkeesian thing as a way to invalidate the positions of others through some sort of appeal. He's essentially taking things people say on one topic equating these views to those of Anita Sarkeesian, and then telling people they are wrong because she is a bad person.

This doesn't help the discussion on this board at all. Its akin to when people would call eachother brainwashed in the long ago closed threads on ukraine and russia.


No, I'm not continually bringing Anita Sarkessian, kz w/e ever his name is brought up my posts from pages ago and called me out.

What kind of man am I if I don't stand by my own words?

And I didn't say what kzw w/e his name is representing Anita, everything I brought up is actually attempting to helping her cause by saying:

"Here is the road to what you want, walk on it."


I suggesting dropping it. Your posts have become a rather large annoyance on this thread.
Average means I'm better than half of you.
sevencck
Profile Joined August 2011
Canada704 Posts
October 18 2014 19:14 GMT
#538
On October 19 2014 04:01 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 03:51 sevencck wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?


I certainly agree with you here, but shouldn't the same logic apply to the gaming world? Choose which companies and which products you want to associate with, and if you don't want to you don't need to? Shouldn't we apply the same judgement about questioning the ethics and marketing of gaming companies trying to sell a product?

If Sarkeesian's work is to be respected by invoking choice, why shouldn't that apply equally to the broader gaming world?


It totally can, but the conversation is about informing individuals to make that choice. I mean if you react to a critique of something with "if you don't like it then leave", well thats not very productive is it? The entire point of entering into debate and discussion is to learn about different viewpoints and trying to understand them so you can come to a conclusion for yourself while being respectful of the other side. If you do not want to take part in a discussion but rather hold your position steadfastly without considering the other you might as well not be discussing and its in that situation where I ask that you just avoid the things/people you don't like.


You're right, and I agree with a few things Sarkeesian et. al. have mentioned, my objection is precisely the point you're trying to make; they are extremely unwilling to engage differing viewpoints with anything beyond accusations of misogyny etc. She isn't wrong to complain about some of the things she identifies, she's wrong to dismiss the culture as being misogynistic because things aren't being fine tuned to her specifications. In principle I can agree with the content of what Sarkeesian is saying while prioritizing liberty over "fixing" some of these problems, and in that sense be opposed to what she's promoting. Are some games childish? Absolutely, but let people make them, and let consumers buy them.
I like to think that the moon is there even if I am not looking at it. -Albert Einstein
ZeromuS
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Canada13389 Posts
October 18 2014 19:19 GMT
#539
On October 19 2014 04:14 sevencck wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 04:01 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:51 sevencck wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?


I certainly agree with you here, but shouldn't the same logic apply to the gaming world? Choose which companies and which products you want to associate with, and if you don't want to you don't need to? Shouldn't we apply the same judgement about questioning the ethics and marketing of gaming companies trying to sell a product?

If Sarkeesian's work is to be respected by invoking choice, why shouldn't that apply equally to the broader gaming world?


It totally can, but the conversation is about informing individuals to make that choice. I mean if you react to a critique of something with "if you don't like it then leave", well thats not very productive is it? The entire point of entering into debate and discussion is to learn about different viewpoints and trying to understand them so you can come to a conclusion for yourself while being respectful of the other side. If you do not want to take part in a discussion but rather hold your position steadfastly without considering the other you might as well not be discussing and its in that situation where I ask that you just avoid the things/people you don't like.


You're right, and I agree with a few things Sarkeesian et. al. have mentioned, my objection is precisely the point you're trying to make; they are extremely unwilling to engage differing viewpoints with anything beyond accusations of misogyny etc. She isn't wrong to complain about some of the things she identifies, she's wrong to dismiss the culture as being misogynistic because things aren't being fine tuned to her specifications. In principle I can agree with the content of what Sarkeesian is saying while prioritizing liberty over "fixing" some of these problems, and in that sense be opposed to what she's promoting. Are some games childish? Absolutely, but let people make them, and let consumers buy them.


To be fair though, the fact that there is no engagement on differing viewpoints is in part due to the medium chosen. Youtube is effectively television and the videos are in essence just a presentation. If there was an option to engage in debate and discussion at large nuance could be achieved, but in the medium and form of presentation chosen it just can't happen. Perhaps, in the future after the core of the position is fully explained more nuance can be added which would greatly improve the appeal to the masses imo. In the end just be critical of the critique and choose to understand (not necessarily accept) the position presented.

I can understand a lot of things while accepting very little of it.
StrategyRTS forever | @ZeromuS_plays | www.twitch.tv/Zeromus_
Xiphos
Profile Blog Joined July 2009
Canada7507 Posts
October 18 2014 19:20 GMT
#540
On October 19 2014 04:09 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Show nested quote +
On October 19 2014 04:06 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 04:01 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:51 sevencck wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:46 ZeromuS wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:41 Xiphos wrote:
On October 19 2014 03:34 WolfintheSheep wrote:
On October 18 2014 18:05 ShiroKaisen wrote:
I mean, look at how the last ton of pages in this thread are nothing but people arguing about Anita, with several people insisting that she's a "fraud" or a "criminal." Even TotalBiscuit had to pop in to set that straight. When a considerable amount of what's visible is something that isn't ostensibly part of the message, that's not the 3rd party's fault for misinterpreting, and you can't just blame it all away on a "smear campaign."


Several people is a bit of an overstatement. It's basically just Xiphos being overtly inflammatory, and I've been largely ignoring his posts because that's what he's like.


If some certain people aren't so misinformed about Anita, inflammation isn't needed.

I'm not saying that my opinions toward Anita won't change in the future but so far, her marketing ethics, work ethics, and her lack of game knowledge despite claiming to be a gaming expert proves that she definitely isn't someone that I personally would associate with.

And I'm surprised that nobody have posted up this crucial video regarding the topic here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MxqSwzFy5w


Can we leave it at that then?

Choose you don't want to associate with her and thats great, you don't need to. But if the issue of women in gaming is brought up, and someone uses an example Ms. Sarkeesian uses can you not start derailing by questioning her ethics and marketing?


I certainly agree with you here, but shouldn't the same logic apply to the gaming world? Choose which companies and which products you want to associate with, and if you don't want to you don't need to? Shouldn't we apply the same judgement about questioning the ethics and marketing of gaming companies trying to sell a product?

If Sarkeesian's work is to be respected by invoking choice, why shouldn't that apply equally to the broader gaming world?


It totally can, but the conversation is about informing individuals to make that choice. I mean if you react to a critique of something with "if you don't like it then leave", well thats not very productive is it? The entire point of entering into debate and discussion is to learn about different viewpoints and trying to understand them so you can come to a conclusion for yourself while being respectful of the other side. If you do not want to take part in a discussion but rather hold your position steadfastly without considering the other you might as well not be discussing and its in that situation where I ask that you just avoid the things/people you don't like.

Please don't apply the "on a soapbox" thing I just mentioned to any sort of youtube shit. By its very nature a video or other form of media which is crafted is intended to be a one way form of communication. These aren't one offs, we didn't ask anyone on this board for only one post or for only one viewpoint. A forum is an interactive medium, so people can discuss and respond to one another. Posing questions to one another, describing perspectives is one thing, but to continually be inflammatory with regards to a personal opinion of one person and their ethical standing (without engaging on a discussion of the core position of said person) is another matter entirely.

My statement you quoted isn't a general application, it was intended as a direct response to Xiphos who is continually drudging up an off topic discussion and who continues to bring up the Anita Sarkeesian thing as a way to invalidate the positions of others through some sort of appeal. He's essentially taking things people say on one topic equating these views to those of Anita Sarkeesian, and then telling people they are wrong because she is a bad person.

This doesn't help the discussion on this board at all. Its akin to when people would call eachother brainwashed in the long ago closed threads on ukraine and russia.


No, I'm not continually bringing Anita Sarkessian, kz w/e ever his name is brought up my posts from pages ago and called me out.

What kind of man am I if I don't stand by my own words?

And I didn't say what kzw w/e his name is representing Anita, everything I brought up is actually attempting to helping her cause by saying:

"Here is the road to what you want, walk on it."


I suggesting dropping it. Your posts have become a rather large annoyance on this thread.


If defending one's word with logic and evidence = being annoying to you, then boy you must have a lot aneurysm.

I get that though.

I'm also annoyed by other people telling me stuff that I don't necessarily want to hear but need to hear. But the mature thing is to accept them and not run away from it.
2014 - ᕙ( •̀ل͜•́) ϡ Raise your bows brood warriors! ᕙ( •̀ل͜•́) ϡ
Prev 1 25 26 27 28 29 31 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 2h 11m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Creator 99
ProTech75
StarCraft: Brood War
Nal_rA 6103
BeSt 572
ToSsGirL 499
Larva 259
ggaemo 70
JulyZerg 68
Backho 67
Pusan 43
Dewaltoss 38
ZerO 21
[ Show more ]
NotJumperer 14
ajuk12(nOOB) 10
yabsab 9
Britney 0
Dota 2
XaKoH 740
XcaliburYe232
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K1301
Other Games
summit1g7047
ceh9606
singsing296
Fuzer 184
SortOf69
Beastyqt32
ZerO(Twitch)2
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 29
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 12 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• StrangeGG 47
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Stunt943
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
2h 11m
Serral vs Cure
Solar vs Classic
OSC
5h 11m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 1h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 5h
CSO Cup
1d 7h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 9h
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.