4 ms·

You'll get a bunch of posts on this topic, but I guess if people repeat a lie often enough and with a big enough megaphone it becomes "the truth" because the ma

by Nadya 8y ago

You'll get a bunch of posts on this topic, but I guess if people repeat a lie often enough and with a big enough megaphone it becomes "the truth" because the majority of their information on the topic comes from the media spouting "the truth". If you want any sort of unbiased responses on this topic you can't look at it from afar or from responses (including mine) - it will actually require some independent research and a willingness to read both sides.

AlexandrB 8y ago
I see stuff like this posted all the time and I start to feel like I'm taking crazy pills. I was there when Gamergate started. I read the original post by Quinn's boyfriend. I followed what happened in the next 4-6 months with unhealthy obsession. I even had several debates on Twitter with people who professed to be concerned about ethics in journalism. My conclusion: there is little to no evidence of the kind of collusion that was alleged by gamergate. Indeed, most of the corruption that was (and still is) out there was big name publishers inviting reviewers to lavish review events or blacklisting reviewers that give unfavorable scores - something gamergate seemed to care little about. Not an indie developer sleeping his/her way to the top. Gamergate also seemed to fundamentally misunderstand the purpose and form of games criticism - frequently demanding "objective" reviews. As if that's something that's possible or even desirable in an artistic medium. Finally, at some point the whole movement was co-opted by reactionary and conservative commentators whose agenda had nothing to do with gaming and everything to do with pushing traditional gender roles and anti-SJW mania. Basically the "PC police" complaints from 15 years ago transplanted into a new host community that was ripe for it.
- patrickmay 8y ago
  Interesting. I was there at the beginning, too, and like you I followed it in detail. My view is that, from the beginning, Quinn's supporters turned it into an anti-(stereotypical)gamer culture war. The GameJournosPro mailing list and multiple articles with nearly identical spin coming out on the same day are pretty good evidence of collusion. I strongly encourage anyone still interested in the topic to watch some of Christina Hoff Sommers videos about it. She demonstrates that it is possible to discuss the actual issues without demonizing one's opponents.
  - Dirlewanger 8y ago
    People see what they want to see unfortunately. I guarantee that if you ask the majority of the people here what the BlackLivesMatter movement is, they'll bring up the peaceful protests and activism of the black community and not the riots and widespread arson that also occurred. Same thing here: they'll focus on the small minority of people that personally attacked Quinn et al instead of the larger issue of a corrupt industry.
    - gamblor956 8y ago
      not the riots and widespread arson that also occurred Cites needed. The only results claiming BLM-related arsons and riots are online zines known to be fronts for white nationalist movements. Edit: As a followup, a number of white supremacists set fires and framed the BLM for those fires, but were subsequently caught and are in various stages of the criminal justice process.
      - Dirlewanger 8y ago
        Don't know what you're talking about. Go on YouTube and just search blacklivesmatter riots. There's dozens of news reports and firsthand accounts of this in numerous cities.
- Nadya 8y ago
  >Indeed, most of the corruption that was (and still is) out there was big name publishers inviting reviewers to lavish review events or blacklisting reviewers that give unfavorable scores - something gamergate seemed to care little about. Which is the majority of what I saw only weeks after the initial episode. Although it took the movement a few months before realizing that mainstream media outlets were going to lock step with the media outlets being criticized instead of independently researching at all. It's easier for me to cite a source that cites its sources than simply parrot them here [0] [1]. The blacklisting/censoring reviewers is also mentioned quite frequently ,on Twitter, at least. Not sure about on Deepfreeze. >Gamergate also seemed to fundamentally misunderstand the purpose and form of games criticism - frequently demanding "objective" reviews. As if that's something that's possible or even desirable in an artistic medium. There is a place for critics, who develop their palettes of tastes, and review games based on that. You can find a critic you tend to agree with and hold their opinions with more weight. The problem surfaces when the critics all have the same (social) biases and aren't reviewing the game itself so much as they are reviewing the game as a form of media from a social commentary slant. Especially when the community doesn't give a shit about the social commentary slant and wants to know about the game. (Which is why Gamergate quickly devolved into a culture war - which is when I stopped following the movement as closely.) But I disagree with your second point. You can create an objectively bad and poorly designed game. Riddled with bugs with little to no thought of how game mechanics should interact with one another. Throw in a jarring, repetitive soundtrack and poorly written dialogue/story full of typos. If you were able to picture what would be considered a completely trash game with no redeeming factors - you're certainly capable of doing the opposite. This will be my last post on HN regarding this thread. If you'd like to continue discussion (although discussion around #GG tends to be quite fruitless as anyone with an opinion on it has long since chosen their side) you're free to email me or contact me through any other means I list on my website, found on my profile. [0] http://www.deepfreeze.it/ethics.php?s=Corruption http://www.deepfreeze.it/ethics.php?s=Corruption [1] http://www.deepfreeze.it/ethics.php?s=Cronyism http://www.deepfreeze.it/ethics.php?s=Cronyism

by Nadya 8y ago

AlexandrB 8y ago

I see stuff like this posted all the time and I start to feel like I'm taking crazy pills. I was there when Gamergate started. I read the original post by Quinn's boyfriend. I followed what happened in the next 4-6 months with unhealthy obsession. I even had several debates on Twitter with people who professed to be concerned about ethics in journalism. My conclusion: there is little to no evidence of the kind of collusion that was alleged by gamergate. Indeed, most of the corruption that was (and still is) out there was big name publishers inviting reviewers to lavish review events or blacklisting reviewers that give unfavorable scores - something gamergate seemed to care little about. Not an indie developer sleeping his/her way to the top. Gamergate also seemed to fundamentally misunderstand the purpose and form of games criticism - frequently demanding "objective" reviews. As if that's something that's possible or even desirable in an artistic medium. Finally, at some point the whole movement was co-opted by reactionary and conservative commentators whose agenda had nothing to do with gaming and everything to do with pushing traditional gender roles and anti-SJW mania. Basically the "PC police" complaints from 15 years ago transplanted into a new host community that was ripe for it.

patrickmay 8y ago
Interesting. I was there at the beginning, too, and like you I followed it in detail. My view is that, from the beginning, Quinn's supporters turned it into an anti-(stereotypical)gamer culture war. The GameJournosPro mailing list and multiple articles with nearly identical spin coming out on the same day are pretty good evidence of collusion. I strongly encourage anyone still interested in the topic to watch some of Christina Hoff Sommers videos about it. She demonstrates that it is possible to discuss the actual issues without demonizing one's opponents.
- Dirlewanger 8y ago
  People see what they want to see unfortunately. I guarantee that if you ask the majority of the people here what the BlackLivesMatter movement is, they'll bring up the peaceful protests and activism of the black community and not the riots and widespread arson that also occurred. Same thing here: they'll focus on the small minority of people that personally attacked Quinn et al instead of the larger issue of a corrupt industry.
  - gamblor956 8y ago
    not the riots and widespread arson that also occurred Cites needed. The only results claiming BLM-related arsons and riots are online zines known to be fronts for white nationalist movements. Edit: As a followup, a number of white supremacists set fires and framed the BLM for those fires, but were subsequently caught and are in various stages of the criminal justice process.
    - Dirlewanger 8y ago
      Don't know what you're talking about. Go on YouTube and just search blacklivesmatter riots. There's dozens of news reports and firsthand accounts of this in numerous cities.
Nadya 8y ago
>Indeed, most of the corruption that was (and still is) out there was big name publishers inviting reviewers to lavish review events or blacklisting reviewers that give unfavorable scores - something gamergate seemed to care little about. Which is the majority of what I saw only weeks after the initial episode. Although it took the movement a few months before realizing that mainstream media outlets were going to lock step with the media outlets being criticized instead of independently researching at all. It's easier for me to cite a source that cites its sources than simply parrot them here [0] [1]. The blacklisting/censoring reviewers is also mentioned quite frequently ,on Twitter, at least. Not sure about on Deepfreeze. >Gamergate also seemed to fundamentally misunderstand the purpose and form of games criticism - frequently demanding "objective" reviews. As if that's something that's possible or even desirable in an artistic medium. There is a place for critics, who develop their palettes of tastes, and review games based on that. You can find a critic you tend to agree with and hold their opinions with more weight. The problem surfaces when the critics all have the same (social) biases and aren't reviewing the game itself so much as they are reviewing the game as a form of media from a social commentary slant. Especially when the community doesn't give a shit about the social commentary slant and wants to know about the game. (Which is why Gamergate quickly devolved into a culture war - which is when I stopped following the movement as closely.) But I disagree with your second point. You can create an objectively bad and poorly designed game. Riddled with bugs with little to no thought of how game mechanics should interact with one another. Throw in a jarring, repetitive soundtrack and poorly written dialogue/story full of typos. If you were able to picture what would be considered a completely trash game with no redeeming factors - you're certainly capable of doing the opposite. This will be my last post on HN regarding this thread. If you'd like to continue discussion (although discussion around #GG tends to be quite fruitless as anyone with an opinion on it has long since chosen their side) you're free to email me or contact me through any other means I list on my website, found on my profile. [0] http://www.deepfreeze.it/ethics.php?s=Corruption http://www.deepfreeze.it/ethics.php?s=Corruption [1] http://www.deepfreeze.it/ethics.php?s=Cronyism http://www.deepfreeze.it/ethics.php?s=Cronyism