EPTBut someone somewhere sucked some dick to get IGN and the likes give Middle-earth a 9.3. Seems to me like gaming journalism in general is pretty full of shit and has been for 10+ years now. But all this gamergate nonsense is stupid.
Gamergate and video game journalism - Page 5
| Forum Index > Closed |
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 | ||
|
d00p
711 Posts
But someone somewhere sucked some dick to get IGN and the likes give Middle-earth a 9.3. Seems to me like gaming journalism in general is pretty full of shit and has been for 10+ years now. But all this gamergate nonsense is stupid. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4733 Posts
I dont really know why people keep bringing in Zoe "WhateverHerNameIs". I do want to talk about gaming jurnalism. Not her. If she had her account hacked and life threatend she should go to police, nothing i can do about it. | ||
|
Geisterkarle
Germany3257 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:13 Jibba wrote: It's not a discussion, it's a 4chan campaign. Sheesh. It has pretty clear hateful roots and the accusations against Quinn and the idea that women have an unfair advantage in software development/tech journalism is laughable. Come on, TL. You know better than this, right? http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/09/new-chat-logs-show-how-4chan-users-pushed-gamergate-into-the-national-spotlight/ It doesn't matter where it came from! Fact is: There are real issues in journalism today! And I mean that at a whole, nut just the gaming industry. But in the "normal" press ethical standards say, that journalists should reveal any connections they have to the article they wrote! And even there this is not followed through. In gaming journalism and criticism it's even worse! People are doing favors for money, early game copies or maybe actually even sex, ... and nobody knows where a good review came from! And we should talk about that! If that is "#gamergate" or "#wubdiwoop" or "#journalism" doesn't matter! So basically nobody should be either pro or con #gamergate, because it's always what you interpret and connect with that! It's a real mess! | ||
|
WakaDoDo
Sweden1183 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:27 Silvanel wrote: I dont really know why people keep bringing in Zoe "WhateverHerNameIs". I do want to talk about gaming jurnalism. Not her.. This is the issue. Big sites will talk about her and the so called SJWs agendas in their gaming pieces. If they talk about it, it will have an impact on future games being developed/released. We are in this unfortunate situation where we actually have to talk about something thats in reality dosent deserve this ammount of attention. | ||
|
Gowerly
United Kingdom916 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:13 Jibba wrote: It's not a discussion, it's a 4chan campaign. Sheesh. It has pretty clear hateful roots and the accusations against Quinn and the idea that women have an unfair advantage in software development/tech journalism is laughable. Come on, TL. You know better than this, right? http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2014/09/new-chat-logs-show-how-4chan-users-pushed-gamergate-into-the-national-spotlight/ Again with the labeling. It was not "4chan", it was some users that go on 4chan. that's like me saying all TLers are PUAs because there was a couple of pages about that in the Dating thread. What I can't understand is: If it started off as this, then how and where did the evidence of actual collusion and corruption come from? It makes little sense. It's not fabricated and the response of 14 articles all stating "Gamers are Dead" is not a particularly clever response. All seems slightly fishy to me, there. | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:42 Geisterkarle wrote: It doesn't matter where it came from! Fact is: There are real issues in journalism today! And I mean that at a whole, nut just the gaming industry. But in the "normal" press ethical standards say, that journalists should reveal any connections they have to the article they wrote! And even there this is not followed through. In gaming journalism and criticism it's even worse! People are doing favors for money, early game copies or maybe actually even sex, ... and nobody knows where a good review came from! And we should talk about that! If that is "#gamergate" or "#wubdiwoop" or "#journalism" doesn't matter! So basically nobody should be either pro or con #gamergate, because it's always what you interpret and connect with that! It's a real mess! Do you think gaming journalism is any more or less corrupt than it was 10 years ago? I'd argue it's cleaned up a whole lot. There's a whole other thread (and plenty of other places for discussion) if you want to talk about journalism as a whole. The catalyst for this specific movement right now is a story about a woman, and the group fanning the flames are chantards. Gamergate should be isolated entirely from any discussion on journalistic standards, in gaming or anything else. I mean honestly, Metacritic makes it incredibly simple to detect "logrolling" among journalists and websites. You could run statistical analysis on this stuff and pinpoint which developer/publisher gets abnormally higher scores and from whom. But none of that data has been presented. The only thing spurring this is a fictional anecdote. If there's truly a trend going on, then there's raw data that will support it. Luckily gaming journalists' opinions are easily traceable and comparable, and the whole situation should be easy to report. I've yet to see that report. Considering gaming journalists are essentially amateurs, I highly doubt any logrolling that exists is concealed. | ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:45 Gowerly wrote: Again with the labeling. It was not "4chan", it was some users that go on 4chan. that's like me saying all TLers are PUAs because there was a couple of pages about that in the Dating thread. What I can't understand is: If it started off as this, then how and where did the evidence of actual collusion and corruption come from? It makes little sense. It's not fabricated and the response of 14 articles all stating "Gamers are Dead" is not a particularly clever response. All seems slightly fishy to me, there. How about this: The type of idiots who do dumb shit on /b/ for the lulz manufactured this current "controversy." They openly discussed the dumb shit they hoped to accomplish by running it. It doesn't matter what site they came from, but they made their intentions entirely clear - it's not about journalism. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4733 Posts
| ||
|
BreAKerTV
Taiwan1658 Posts
However, if we snap back to the reality of the present situation, with death threats getting in everyone's inbox every time they want to hold a summit about what is happening or give a speech about their role in - insert form of media outlet here - it makes me think that we have reached a point where the damage we are trying to control is becoming more and more out of control... Right now, I want all of it to stop - corrupt media giving 5 stars to something that is lack luster in quality, and people emailing death threats to people who think they are doing their jobs. I have no doubt that both lines of people - pure and corrupt - are being targetted in this campaign. On October 15 2014 21:48 Jibba wrote: Do you think gaming journalism is any more or less corrupt than it was 10 years ago? I'd argue it's cleaned up a whole lot. Not just Journalism, but sometimes the companies that make the games themselves... True story - a friend of mine used to work for Ion Storm. For those of you who heard all the rumors about those guys, chances are they weren't just rumors. Rampant parties, John Romero driving ferraris, used to have a playboy playmate girlfriend that was previously a pro gamer without make up, and after it all collapsed he was lucky to break even. However, nowadays John does delve in to other projects. One that I can think of off the top of my head was The Walking Dead game on Steam. | ||
|
hummingbird23
Norway359 Posts
http://www.standard.net/Police/2014/10/14/Utah-State-University-student-threatens-act-of-terror-if-feminist.html This has gotten so far beyond bullshit. And for those people talking about "both sides", fuck that. This level of idiocy is NEVER justified. Period. | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:56 hummingbird23 wrote: Yep, it's gotten to threats of terrorism and massacre. http://www.standard.net/Police/2014/10/14/Utah-State-University-student-threatens-act-of-terror-if-feminist.html This has gotten so far beyond bullshit. And for those people talking about "both sides", fuck that. This level of idiocy is NEVER justified. Period. Seeing how I was one of the people talking about both sides I'm going to tell you to stop trying to put words in my mouth. I had hoped we here at TL could refrain from this sort of ridiculous strawmanning. Just because I point out that both sides have been flinging shit does not mean I condone either sides shit-flinging. In fact it means the exact opposite despite what you attempt to imply. And this sort of thing is obviously never justified - and no one has claimed it to be. | ||
|
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:50 Jibba wrote: How about this: The type of idiots who do dumb shit on /b/ for the lulz manufactured this current "controversy." They openly discussed the dumb shit they hoped to accomplish by running it. It doesn't matter what site they came from, but they made their intentions entirely clear - it's not about journalism. Jibba, I don't want to accuse you of being misinformed, because that has been used too much. However, I do want to point towards the language used in the article you linked. If you read it carefully, all the words used do not explicitly state "it's a 4chan campaign". Let me put in some quotes to give you some context on what I mean. A set of IRC logs released Saturday appear to show that a handful of 4chan users were ultimately behind #GamerGate, The opening statement of the article uses the word "appear". There is no explicit statement that says "it was the 4chan users". Discussion logs, however, suggest that #notyourshield didn't begin as a broad movement but was a campaign manufactured and orchestrated by 4chan users via sockpuppet Twitter accounts. Again the word "suggest" which implies that it could be true. However, when someone is already biased, they will read it as the definite truth. And, according to screenshots recently released by Quinn, so was the original #GamerGate. So according to someone being the target of the harassment (i.e. Quinn), gamergate was started by these 4chan users? You have to really dig deep and read each word used when reading any news. That article is full of words like "alleged", "appears", "suggest". All of this doesn't explicitly state that the 4chan users are the cause of gamergate, but only suggest they could be the cause. Please remember I am not advocating for either side of this debate, I am only trying to understand both sides of the discussion. To understand it, I need to dig deep and actively think about why each person used specific words. In the age of social media, the words chosen can have an astounding impact on the audience at large. | ||
|
Celadan
Norway471 Posts
Theres alot of content already covereing gamergate that infact shows how fucked the games "journalists" have been. Blatant corruption seems to be fine with feminists though | ||
|
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:56 BreAKerTV wrote: I have no beefs with your post Jett.Jack.Alvir. I've seen everything you have denoted in the post you were warned about in real life. And the fact of the matter is, I am painfully new to the industry of eSports. However, if we snap back to the reality of the present situation, with death threats getting in everyone's inbox every time they want to hold a summit about what is happening or give a speech about their role in - insert form of media outlet here - it makes me think that we have reached a point where the damage we are trying to control is becoming more and more out of control... Right now, I want all of it to stop - corrupt media giving 5 stars to something that is lack luster in quality, and people emailing death threats to people who think they are doing their jobs. I have no doubt that both lines of people - pure and corrupt - are being targetted in this campaign. Not just Journalism, but sometimes the companies that make the games themselves... True story - a friend of mine used to work for Ion Storm. For those of you who heard all the rumors about those guys, chances are they weren't just rumors. Rampant parties, John Romero driving ferraris, used to have a playboy playmate girlfriend that was previously a pro gamer without make up, and after it all collapsed he was lucky to break even. However, nowadays John does delve in to other projects. One that I can think of off the top of my head was The Walking Dead game on Steam. I want it to all stop also. Everything is an exercise in futility. Corruption being weeded out through use of death threats is not the community I want to be involved in. The two wrongs are not making anything right, but ultimately this will only stop when everyone puts aside their bias; stops stamping the other party with labels; and learns to respect each other. Even in TL we get many people smacking down the label on other TL users. Hell, TL is supposed to be a small community, yet we have camps and factions already dividing TL into the pro and anti gamergate. Everyone needs to stop generalizing each other and listen closely to what the other has to say. | ||
|
Jett.Jack.Alvir
Canada2250 Posts
On October 15 2014 22:15 Celadan wrote: Some random trolls sends threats the whole argument is therefore invalid.... Theres alot of content already covereing gamergate that infact shows how fucked the games "journalists" have been. http://youtu.be/_dbi-8rPShE Blatant corruption seems to be fine with feminists though The video was already posted, and no one is arguing about video game journalist being corrupt. Many probably agree, on both sides of the discussion. However, your comment about feminists being fine with corruption is asinine. There have been no statements from the feminist camp that stated "we are ok with corruption". They just believe the corruption angle was used as a veil to conceal the real intent of gamergate, which was to slander Quinn and other women. I don't agree either way, but your comment already shows where your bias lies, and you don't defend it very well. edit: Your video was not posted, I mistaken it for another video posted. Regardless, it tells nothing new so far. At least nothing I can glean from it. | ||
|
hummingbird23
Norway359 Posts
On October 15 2014 22:09 Ghostcom wrote: Seeing how I was one of the people talking about both sides I'm going to tell you to stop trying to put words in my mouth. I had hoped we here at TL could refrain from this sort of ridiculous strawmanning. Just because I point out that both sides have been flinging shit does not mean I condone either sides shit-flinging. In fact it means the exact opposite despite what you attempt to imply. And this sort of thing is obviously never justified - and no one has claimed it to be. Because when insanity at this level (terrorism) is on sale (on one side, mind you), it makes sense to keep covering that shit up with a pleasant discussion of game reviews and conflicts of interest. I'll point you to paralleluniverse's post, which said it better than I could. link The nonexistent scandal somehow metastasized into a shitstorm because the majority of people involved in it are reasonable people that just wanted to talk about conflicts of interest in video game reviews? That's like saying that neo-nazi parties are reasonable political parties because hey, they highlight issues I'm interested in. Add that to the fact that absolutely nothing has been accomplished or even attempted in the name of cleaning up video game journalism standards (no, "awareness" does not count), while people have been forced from their homes. See also: If you want to campaign against corruption in video game journalism, fantastic! You've chosen the most luxurious righteousness on Earth. But joining #gamergate is like marching under Sauron's flag because you're worried about Minas Tirith's feudal inheritance of rulership. Even if you're claiming more enlightened motivations, you're charging with a stinking mob intent on ruining everything, unleashed by a raging asshole. http://www.cracked.com/blog/7-ways-gamergate-debate-has-made-world-worse_p2/ There is no equivalency here. On October 15 2014 18:58 Jett.Jack.Alvir wrote: First, thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt. I don't want it to sound positive, or even negative. I am truly trying to root out the problems on both sides of this gamergate. While its true the gamergate movement was used as a vehicle for misogynist assholes to lash out at women and feminist, I don't see everything quite as black and white. That doesn't mean I condone the actions of death threats and harassment, I just feel that some people are truly upset that the game publishers and developers are sitting too closely to the gaming news outlets. You have to remember, a movement is purely contextual. Gamergate can mean different things; at the moment to you it means an excuse for assholes to be a bigger asshole. To another, it means journalistic integrity. On October 15 2014 20:32 adwodon wrote: Gamergate is just the lack of understanding on both sides. 'Gamers' seem to expect professional quality journalism in their interests without paying for it. Games journalists don't realise they are basically glorified hobbyists because there is no money in games journalism, there are no standards and no established ethics because they are hobbyists and no one cares about the integrity of hobbyists. So basically journalists need to get some professional standards and gamers need to pay them for it to prevent them being forced into the hands of businesses and advertisers who would pay their salaries... but whats actually happening is harassment and bullshit because no one understand the situation on the other side of the fence and we all just enjoy flinging shit. If you want professional journalism, look to the major publications which aren't hobbyist. WSJ, New Statesman, Guardian, Metro etc etc They have professional journalists and reviewers who will be controlled by an editor who doesn't have ties to the industry and will prevent their journalists attending 'press' events with shady practices. Otherwise you'd better understand that you're reading the opinions and reviews of hobbyists, which is not a bad thing but if they are getting a salary they aren't getting it from you, but from the people who's products they're reviewing thus creating a conflict of interest (as its a hobbyist publication so scope for ad revenue is limited). | ||
|
Gowerly
United Kingdom916 Posts
People have been doing this ANYWAY. ALL THE TIME. FOR YEARS. Suddenly "Gamers" are involved and now we can puff our chests and say that we're against a group called GamerGate! Hooray! An emeny with a name! Now we can go to war! Except you can't. Because in this group you've got a whole bunch of people that want different things. Yes, a lot of games journalists are hobbyists that are getting paid not much at all to review and preview games. Still, if there's underhanded-ness going on in there, it should be brought out where possible. Saying that all of GamerGate now is out to fire women into the Sun or whatever, to use the above neo-nazi analogy (huehue Godwin's law!) is like saying all of Islam is part of ISIS. There's nothing more a lot of people that are part of GamerGate (and especially #NotYourShield, who have been exploited by those very news sites when they were claiming that it's a bunch of privileged white dudes whining about them) want to do other than distance themselves from the heinousness that has been going on. Say GamerGate dies and that all goes from twitter and whatever. WOMEN WILL BE SAFE FOREVER! Except they won't. Still. Because harassment and death threats are sent all the time and will still be sent all the time. Suggesting that GamerGate is all about this is ridiculous. This treatment of others on the internet will continue by the same people until something, if anything can be, is done about the people themselves. Not about some twitter tag, not about ideas about games journalism. Not about news sites, about the people doing this. You can #StopGamerGate2014 all you like. What you need to do is #StopBeingAwfulToEachOther Edit: For clarity this is still an argument about the use of labels/tags for these kinds of things, rather than a criticism of stopping harassment. | ||
|
hummingbird23
Norway359 Posts
On October 15 2014 22:58 Gowerly wrote: So, yes, some people under the GamerGate tag have been harassing, sending death threats, etc, to women via the medium of the internet. People have been doing this ANYWAY. ALL THE TIME. FOR YEARS. Suddenly "Gamers" are involved and now we can puff our chests and say that we're against a group called GamerGate! Hooray! An emeny with a name! Now we can go to war! Except you can't. Because in this group you've got a whole bunch of people that want different things. Yes, a lot of games journalists are hobbyists that are getting paid not much at all to review and preview games. Still, if there's underhanded-ness going on in there, it should be brought out where possible. Saying that all of GamerGate now is out to fire women into the Sun or whatever, to use the above neo-nazi analogy (huehue Godwin's law!) is like saying all of Islam is part of ISIS. There's nothing more a lot of people that are part of GamerGate (and especially #NotYourShield, who have been exploited by those very news sites when they were claiming that it's a bunch of privileged white dudes whining about them) want to do other than distance themselves from the heinousness that has been going on. Say GamerGate dies and that all goes from twitter and whatever. WOMEN WILL BE SAFE FOREVER! Except they won't. Still. Because harassment and death threats are sent all the time and will still be sent all the time. Suggesting that GamerGate is all about this is ridiculous. This treatment of others on the internet will continue by the same people until something, if anything can be, is done about the people themselves. Not about some twitter tag, not about ideas about games journalism. Not about news sites, about the people doing this. You can #StopGamerGate2014 all you like. What you need to do is #StopBeingAwfulToEachOther Except that ISIS has been so thoroughly reviled even within Islam. They don't want anything to do with that shit. The association between GG and video game journalism should be called out for what it is, a transparent ploy. It's very telling that the "being awful" by GG has resulted in far greater damage than anything done to anyone in GG. Again, there is no equivalency. EDIT: About that first paragraph. Yes, people have been doing it for years. Whom, you might ask, are frequent recipients of such ridiculously over the top behavior? These people. See a connection? | ||
|
Geisterkarle
Germany3257 Posts
On October 15 2014 21:48 Jibba wrote: Do you think gaming journalism is any more or less corrupt than it was 10 years ago? I'd argue it's cleaned up a whole lot. There's a whole other thread (and plenty of other places for discussion) if you want to talk about journalism as a whole. I don't know if it got better or worse. Because most "irregularities" in journalism standards on my "radar" for the last years were about politics, economy, maybe travel, ... but gaming was not in the "mainstream press". You hear bits and pieces, but it never "got out" like gamergate now. The catalyst for this specific movement right now is a story about a woman, and the group fanning the flames are chantards. Gamergate should be isolated entirely from any discussion on journalistic standards, in gaming or anything else. Which woman? Zoe? Quinngate (which was waaaaaay before gamergate) was exactly about journalism standards. "Too bad" she was a woman, so that sexist accusations also found their way into the discussion. Which is the same as now: YOU (and many others) say, that gamergate is NOT about journalism standards but about sexism and misogyny and females in the gaming industry. OTHERS (and there are also many) say, that gamergate is EXACTLY about journalism standards, especially in the gaming industry and NOT about sexism! So, tell me: You all are talking about different things with the same hashtag! Which "side" is right? And if you answer please add a "why" that is above "because I say so!" | ||
|
Ghostcom
Denmark4782 Posts
None of what I have said can even remotely closely be equated to: On October 15 2014 hummingbird23 wrote: That's like saying that neo-nazi parties are reasonable political parties because hey, they highlight issues I'm interested in. To be 100% clear: I do not consider myself part of GamerGate, nor do I consider myself part of the anti-GamerGate. I am a bystander thoroughly sick of the entire ordeal. Leaking the SSN, adresses and contacting employers of people who disagree with you is deplorable and has been done by both sides. I also find it kinda funny that you decide to link to cracked.com in a thread discussing integrity of journalism... Not really a shining beacon (and the article has been discussed in plenty on Reddit and was debunked entirely). With regards to the hobbyist argument: I think most people would accept the biased reporting if the gaming sites would actually disclaim their vested interests. The issue arises when sites like IG try to pass a funded review off as an objective review. If they had a disclaimer stating that they were financially supported there would be little argument. From now on you can argue with yourself - you don't seem to actually need me anyway. | ||
| ||
