4 ms·

I'm not sure which of those you think is wrong, that excerpt seems pretty accurate to me.

oolongCat 10y ago
Because the whole "gamergate" thing was not about attacking female gamers. If I recall correctly they were after people who were villainizing video games.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  You recall incorrectly. (Originally it started about "ethics in video game journalism", but it took about two minutes for them to pivot to attacking women.)
  - crooked-v 10y ago
    Any "ethics" stuff in the original allegations against Zoe Quinn was false in the first place, as anyone involved could have verified with about five minutes of research.
- crooked-v 10y ago
  You don't recall correctly. The whole thing started with false accusations of unethical conduct against a particular female game developer (Zoe Quinn), followed by harrassment campaigns and personal threats against that same person.
  - milankragujevic 10y ago
    How is it false? Not trolling, just out of the loop for a while.
- kaikai 10y ago
  You're recalling incorrectly.
- psyc 10y ago
  Their 2 pillars are: opposing corruption in game journalism, and opposing political attempts to discourage violence and sexuality in games. There are many women who support GG. The angle about it being anti-women was consciously created by a woman who was caught in a scandal, and published a fairly high-profile PR article in order to protect her reputation.
- PhasmaFelis 10y ago
  Eron Gjoni publicly accused his girlfriend Zoe Quinn of cheating on him with several men, whom he named. One of the men was a games journalist who had once written a few sentences about a free game Quinn made, in a larger article. (Several months before he allegedly slept with her, by Gjoni's own admission.) This, alone, was taken as proof positive that gaming journalism (and the gaming industry in general) was in the pocket of corrupt feminist interests, and founded an entire movement based on rooting out and exposing examples of same. The story somehow became that Quinn was openly sleeping with half the games journalism industry in exchange for good reviews of her games. Now that the facts are out, the smarter Gamergaters try to downplay the Quinn episode or pretend that it never happened, inventing an alternate, less embarrassing origin story about ethics in games journalism. Unfortunately, a lot of people seem to be buying it.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
In case you're sincere: the neutral explanation of the situation would be that they're upset by the industry response to women becoming a larger market segment in gaming, rather than that women play games.
- astrodust 10y ago
  Those two things are basically the same thing: More women gamers, women are a bigger market segment.
  - crooked-v 10y ago
    I'm pretty sure that's the joke.
  - SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
    They're not the same thing, and the refusal of one side to accept the distinction is what most of the contention is about with GamerGate. The response of the games industry to the fact of more women games is a cultural choice on their part, not some forced physical reaction to the mere fact. Hence the distinction between "women in gaming" and the "industry response to more women in gaming". It's entirely possible to like that more women are involved with gaming while not liking how industry leaders have chosen to respond to that fact. I find it strange that so many people don't seem to get the distinction, and suspect that it's willful on their part, because they agree with those cultural choices and don't want to have to defend them.
    - astrodust 10y ago
      What specific complaints do you have to "how industry leaders have chosen to respond"? I'm not even sure what that means and I follow these things quite closely. This isn't just about women in gaming, it's about making gaming more accessible in general. Shooter games where all you do is blast things in the face can be fun, and I loved the hell out of the most recent DOOM, but even given that I do enjoy other kinds of games. There's a need for variety. When everything is "shoot monsters/zombies/Nazis" in the face then gaming becomes boring and tired. It's like a world where the only kind of film was zombie/horror. It would suck. Gaming as a medium is easily as capable as telling a story and conveying emotion as film, and that games aren't as emotionally diverse as film is a huge problem. Representation in gaming is important and when done right it's not even an issue, it's not even obvious. The last instalment of Wolfenstein, a game not exactly known for depth of story, had multiple women characters, one of which had a physical disability, plus a character with a severe mental disability. Maybe they were trying to tick all the boxes, I don't know, but it felt more believable and authentic than the usual Gears of War style bunch-of-generic-burly-dudes-plus-token-(sexy)-woman. This was an underground organization in the middle of World War II and you can't be picky about who you get. Their talents aren't necessarily physical. So maybe you can explain more about their "response" because I'm not sure I understand your take at all.

Because the whole "gamergate" thing was not about attacking female gamers. If I recall correctly they were after people who were villainizing video games.

GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
You recall incorrectly. (Originally it started about "ethics in video game journalism", but it took about two minutes for them to pivot to attacking women.)
- crooked-v 10y ago
  Any "ethics" stuff in the original allegations against Zoe Quinn was false in the first place, as anyone involved could have verified with about five minutes of research.
crooked-v 10y ago
You don't recall correctly. The whole thing started with false accusations of unethical conduct against a particular female game developer (Zoe Quinn), followed by harrassment campaigns and personal threats against that same person.
- milankragujevic 10y ago
  How is it false? Not trolling, just out of the loop for a while.
kaikai 10y ago
You're recalling incorrectly.
psyc 10y ago
Their 2 pillars are: opposing corruption in game journalism, and opposing political attempts to discourage violence and sexuality in games. There are many women who support GG. The angle about it being anti-women was consciously created by a woman who was caught in a scandal, and published a fairly high-profile PR article in order to protect her reputation.
PhasmaFelis 10y ago
Eron Gjoni publicly accused his girlfriend Zoe Quinn of cheating on him with several men, whom he named. One of the men was a games journalist who had once written a few sentences about a free game Quinn made, in a larger article. (Several months before he allegedly slept with her, by Gjoni's own admission.) This, alone, was taken as proof positive that gaming journalism (and the gaming industry in general) was in the pocket of corrupt feminist interests, and founded an entire movement based on rooting out and exposing examples of same. The story somehow became that Quinn was openly sleeping with half the games journalism industry in exchange for good reviews of her games. Now that the facts are out, the smarter Gamergaters try to downplay the Quinn episode or pretend that it never happened, inventing an alternate, less embarrassing origin story about ethics in games journalism. Unfortunately, a lot of people seem to be buying it.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

SomeStupidPoint 10y ago

In case you're sincere: the neutral explanation of the situation would be that they're upset by the industry response to women becoming a larger market segment in gaming, rather than that women play games.

astrodust 10y ago
Those two things are basically the same thing: More women gamers, women are a bigger market segment.
- crooked-v 10y ago
  I'm pretty sure that's the joke.
- SomeStupidPoint 10y ago
  They're not the same thing, and the refusal of one side to accept the distinction is what most of the contention is about with GamerGate. The response of the games industry to the fact of more women games is a cultural choice on their part, not some forced physical reaction to the mere fact. Hence the distinction between "women in gaming" and the "industry response to more women in gaming". It's entirely possible to like that more women are involved with gaming while not liking how industry leaders have chosen to respond to that fact. I find it strange that so many people don't seem to get the distinction, and suspect that it's willful on their part, because they agree with those cultural choices and don't want to have to defend them.
  - astrodust 10y ago
    What specific complaints do you have to "how industry leaders have chosen to respond"? I'm not even sure what that means and I follow these things quite closely. This isn't just about women in gaming, it's about making gaming more accessible in general. Shooter games where all you do is blast things in the face can be fun, and I loved the hell out of the most recent DOOM, but even given that I do enjoy other kinds of games. There's a need for variety. When everything is "shoot monsters/zombies/Nazis" in the face then gaming becomes boring and tired. It's like a world where the only kind of film was zombie/horror. It would suck. Gaming as a medium is easily as capable as telling a story and conveying emotion as film, and that games aren't as emotionally diverse as film is a huge problem. Representation in gaming is important and when done right it's not even an issue, it's not even obvious. The last instalment of Wolfenstein, a game not exactly known for depth of story, had multiple women characters, one of which had a physical disability, plus a character with a severe mental disability. Maybe they were trying to tick all the boxes, I don't know, but it felt more believable and authentic than the usual Gears of War style bunch-of-generic-burly-dudes-plus-token-(sexy)-woman. This was an underground organization in the middle of World War II and you can't be picky about who you get. Their talents aren't necessarily physical. So maybe you can explain more about their "response" because I'm not sure I understand your take at all.