I'm just sitting here listening to a TB stream discussing this whole issue.

I would have thought this would have died months ago. In my experience most SJW movements ran into a pitfall and died after so long (as a brony: the Down With Molestia movement as an example). But the Quinnspiracy hasn't died, it's evolved. And the only stuff I heard on popular non-gamer media (NPR one morning) I heard it only from the anti-misogyny angle.

Gamers tend to get demonized as misogynistic by the media. Even the media for gamers falls into the evil mysoginistic man child gamers cliche. It's so overdone that it's cringe worthy to see news sites who you'd think would be better than this engage in such bigotry against teenage boys and people with Asperger's syndrome.

That how humanity works, they all want someone to demonize and hate.
At the moment that scapegoat is gamers.

Scapegoat has been gamers, ever since table top gamers became accepted. New things are demonized by our elders all the time.

Fuck, Socrates thought WRITING was wrong because it was new.

It's a common thing that society always goes through.
At least it serves as a decent (though not flawless as seen with Socrates) way to tell apart the logical people from those who follow the herd.

Edit: Sorry if that seems rather cold/stingy. I've found myself to be in a very pissy/irritable mood recently.

It has also proven that asshat can ruin everything for people with legit gripes. And that a movement can grow so inflated it gets caught up in its own potrayed importance. Thanks to nutters who take things to seriusly, there are FBI investigations in the works. Bombthreats and deaththreats are what people focus on becouse they stick out the most. The trailed back astrosurfing didn't help GamerGate either. Good journalists (not Anita) are considering stopping to cover games becouse they find themself faced with daily threats on their lives. Before we go into the whole "Its just the internet" it only takes one of those to not be "Just the internet". And to live under constant assault over something you generally love is likely to wear anyone down.

The general fallout of all this is not gonna be beneficial to anyone. Aside maybe ANita, becouse she is getting all the sympathy. Good job internet.

And I took part of the conversations. I have seen what level the general conversations have been at. It hasn't been very constructive. And there have been some bizarre fucking opinions vented. And yes, there is a clear element of mysogony present. Not everyone, but remember you are dealing with a horde of angry netizens here. The loudest opinions are never the sensible ones.

Yes, the 'Astroturfing' Actual minorities who were actually positing to disagree with people and sick of being spoken for. Must be fake, minorities can't have opinions of their own.

Do you even look at what you write? I said that the astroturfing only hurt the movement. Its a thing a thats been used so much on the net, that its no longer anything else then seen as strawman like number manipulation. There are proper channels, and then there is manipulation. All it takes is one or two that fuck up and prove to be disgenuine, fake accounts and you have given your opponent a foot in the door. And that is what happened. On several fronts. And then there are anonymous threats, who are so easily used to discredit anything.

Being perfectly honest, I'd rather we have some journalist be afraid to journalist than have game developers be afraid to develop games cause of bias ratings.

That being said, both are still bad things to happen obviously. We need to be working towards making game journalism honest again, not sending game journalist out the door.

And yet when Anita fakes her death threats so she can plug for her paetron account, does that permanently discredit her from now on?

I'm not 'them', the ones who sent threats. I'm me, and I'm against nepotism and corruption. I'm sorry, Hellis, but saying "A few bad apples ruined you all, go home now and forget anything happened" is fucking moronic.

Magic Magnum said
Being perfectly honest, I'd rather we have some journalist be afraid to journalist than have game developers be afraid to develop games cause of bias ratings.That being said, both are still bad things to happen obviously. We need to be working towards making game journalism honest again, not sending game journalist out the door.

You honestly put games over journalistic freedom of speach. Really? One of them is enterteinment and reviews. The other is DEATH THREATS and shitstorms against what is considered the cornerstone of democracy; free speach.. Just really, really. What kind of priorities do you have here? Baffeling. I am sorry, games is second, fuck, it is eleventh to something like that. Gamedevs themselves are also afraid of doing the games they want, not for reviews but becouse getting anything popular means you gotta deal with entitled kids who think they know games better then them. Becouse if they try something this bloated ego of a collective deems as "not good enough" they are gonna get shit on worse then any review could. A bad review is a bad review, it isn't the nd of the world. Most good games tend to get good reviews regardless of message. Some games like "Gone home" Get good reviews for what in concept was good, and the reviewers liked it enough for the whole message. In that case it is taste, and where they put the importance.

If you don't like it, start reviewing yourself. Don't attack poeple becouse they think differently lest perhaps, it leads in to straight up harmfull behavior; See racism. Then engage them in open, logical debate.

When actual explenations are brought forth, when clear stances are showned it is nothing but scorn in return. This is not about honesty anymore. Anyone disagreeing with them is a traitor and a target for a large portion of this whole thing. A campaign for honesty engages in trying to open discussion, it doesn't attack without substantial proof. You allready proven right there Gwazi, that you hold your own enterteinment higher then freedom of speach. That alone signals to me that you are acting out of entitlement, not out of a honest desire to change something for the better. You are ofcourse, free to prove me wrong.

The gamer fanbases are also entitled as all hell, I should know, I have gotten upset about some really crappy things. But I mean really, really entitled. To qoute a article I read just earlier "Were were the organized outcry when companies were hiring models to mingle and sway male game journalists. Were was the rage when real evidence of bribes was being brought up. " There was none, becouse gamers still got their games. They didnt have to care about such things as guilt, sexism and femism. They didn't care less then. They cared a whole lot when suddenly the games they like got questioned. They cared suddenly about keeping journalism honest when the games THEY didn't like got good reviews. I'm sorry, but that is extremely off putting and dishonest no matter how you look at it from a outside perspective.

Dipper; Where are the proof that they are fake.(No seriusly, I am very interested in this. I googled it and at best I found super circumstatial and unsubstantial claims.) You have goddamn Fbi on the case now. If anything is faked it will show up in their investigation. Please provide substatial proof. I am not saying; go home and forget it. I am saying gamergate is not working, and if you have any semblence of contextual sense, you should realize that association with them is painting you in a bad light. And you know, every time anyone say anything against you, you throw stuff like "Moronic" "you gotta be kidding me."

Earlier you said even said someone wished for rape, pretty much proving how fucked up your view of things are. I mean, you are pretty much showing up with nothing substantial. Yes, you are you. But you are also what you associate with. And you associate with GamerGate who harbors less then reasonable folk. And what can you prove, exactly? And you are proving nothing but confrontational, unreasonable. If you want to provide a argument, I suggest you take a look at how Bravo provides his. I don't agree with everything the man says. But atleast he actually provides proper counter arguments and intelligent discussion.

Another thing, you streghtened the stance of SJW everwhere. They are seen as good guys more so then before. And trust me, I do not like most of them. But damn if 4chan and gamer gate and that bullshit have made them look like fucking angels.

Game Journalism at the moment is honestly little more than "ERMAGAWD! SEXISM!" and "This game is 10/10, because Activision forwarded millions of dollars to our paypal account". It's been like that for a long time now, as much as the dishonesty in it's system bugs me I care less about that than I do about the developers making the games.

No games, no gaming community. No gaming community, no game journalist. Game Journalists need the Developers to survive, they got nothing to be a Journalist about if there's no games to keep a gamer community going.

And Video Games are at the moment fighting an uphill battle to be seen as an artform. To be taken as seriously as movies and literature, and we need more games to do that. Games that take risks at pissing off the public, that delve into serious topics such as say the Holocaust (which MANY movies do) and handle it in a serious way. But people are scared to do that, because game journalism is right there waiting to pounce. To tear the developers apart, ruin their lives, end their careers and damage the game industry all for a few clicks on an article named "VIDEO GAMES HATE JEWISH PEOPLE!".

I mean in movies what do we care more about? The movies themselves or those article reviews you find on rotten tomatoes?
It's not a matter of not liking freedom of speech, I'm all for freedom of speech.
It's a matter of being able to create the very thing you have the freedom to talk about in the first place.

Perhaps you should work on how you present yourself and how you word your opinions next time then. YOu went "I rather people were afraid to be journalists. Then game devs" Guess what is a big part of making games mainstream and more accepted; Journalists covering it. Mainstream journalists are not gonna touch stuff with 10 foot pole when we have groups that are "OMFG, YOU ONLY GAVE THIS GAME A HIGH SCORE FOR ITS LGBT CONTENT". And if they do its the extremely easy "Look at the outrage over reviews giving LGBT content good scores." Incredibly easy to paint people as homophobic that way. And guess what games DO get the artform appreications. Games like TRANSISTOR, games Like BROTHERS. Games that, out a indie game devs perspective, Hit all the rights spots in all the right ways. And games that goes supernova, like Minecraft or world of warcraft get all the talk becouse of something called MONEY. And guess what, people love those games. But we as a community are doing our beloved buisness no favors. I see nobody taking a step back and go "death threats? Holy shit that is fucked up. Throw the book at them." No, I see "They should expect that on the internet." and my favorite "Its all faked. She does it for attention." I am sorry, but right there proves you care more about yourself then what is right. And that you are ok with deaththreats on some level. They are illegal actions, how childish the intentions may be.

I do not like Anita, She is cherry picking everything. Quinn a hypocrite. But the moment a person is under death threats, regardless of their stance we as community should react with more then cynism. It would be so easy, to just go "This need to stop." and band together to fight for a sensible cause. That way she would be FORCED into taking the dabate and then, if we provide reasonable argument, we could get our say. What we have now, is a bunch of people screaming bloody murder, and yes, cherry picking what to care about. Putting all of those involved, on the same terribly low level.

Without games, no gaming journalism? Quite right. But games aren't being made less and less becouse of reviews so I fail to see your reasoning. To say such a thing is factually wrong. The good, genuily good games get fan following, cult statuses and end up selling either way.

Yes I said I'd rather people be afraid to write about games, than be afraid to actually make the game... I don't see why you felt repeating this had some shock effect. :/

And you also act like mainstream = good.
Not to sound like a Hipster, but mainstream is hardly the definition of what's good.
All it means it that media shoves up into people's throats more, and a higher percentage of people like it.
It speaks nothing for the actual quality or legitimacy of the content in question, if your concern is purely numbers you're in the wrong field.
Gaming was never about appealing to everybody, each game is molded to a specific audience.

And good job completely missing the point, never did I claim we didn't already have some good and serious games. But developers are scared to make more of them, and those on more daring topics because of the backlash they would receive. And yes, GAMERS love those games. They aren't the concern of the backlash, the concern is people outside the field reacting to it with full hostility.

And before you reply with "See! We need to be mainstream!" no we don't. D&D isn't mainstream, but it does not suffer such criticism (anymore). Most people may look at it and go "What the hell... this is weird", but they aren't calling it sexist and making people afraid to make new tabletop games. And yes, game companies have to back down from topics all the time because of criticism. If honestly think all the feminazi's like anita, zoe, rebecca watson, laci green etc. haven't caused a developer to halt and go "Maybe I shouldn't make this... I'll lose my job cause people will get mad at me" you seriously need to give the gaming industry an actual look.

And seriously? You're logic makes people like Anita immune from being caught from certain acts... Anita fakes a threat, she get's caught. Suddenly we're being entitled because Anita was being dishonest... Not, you know, the LOGICAL answer of "Oh look! Anita's dishonest, no shit gamer's called it out". No, if Anita is caught doing something bad it's ok, because gamer's are just entitled shits for noticing it. But I'm actually against Anita guys! I said she cherry picks!

For someone who claims gamers need to get together and fight for a cause, you sure do a lot of trying to vilify gamers for getting together and fighting for a cause.
And just like you said, Journalism isn't even needed for a games success. If a game is good, it get's a following of it's own.
So essentially it's doing far more harm to games of making them all look evil and making developers avoid certain topics, rather doing good.

I'm sorry if you don't get the concept of a reviewer needs the game to review first.
But that's life, game journalists need games. Me prioritizing games is not sexism, it's not entitlement, it is hard, logical fact.

"Me prioritizing games is not sexism, it's not entitlement, it is hard, logical fact."

Besides the 'fact' that you are not presenting any actual facts, backed by any sort of evidence of your thesis and have yet to provide the faked death threat, a coherent argument or a power counter argument. Instead you strawman and put words that i didn't say and tried to derive a different meaning then what I stated. There was a actual, real and bomb threat, against a public building, over the fact that a woman doesn't agree with us and percieve a problem and might have exploited sympathy to sell her shit. The moment, the very moment threats of pshysical violence comes up we have to take a stand against it if we are to be anywhere close to credible. Never once did I say stop critizing her. Never once did I say it made her immune. YOu on the other hand, is being sympathetic towards criminal activity. Towards the quelling of free speach.

I never said "We have to be mainstream." I said that Mainstream media is a large part of what makes or break many art forms. Acceptence for what it is, critical acclaim. These are things that are needed to be considered. Its sheer naivity to think reaching mainstream success is important. And good job by the way, not at all adressing the fact the point that gamers drive gamedevs on the run aswell. See, the way people dogged bioware writing staff. It's a case of sheer entitlement. Now criticism is fair. But all that's been succeded in this is to completely polarize the conflict. Us Vs Them. Bohh them. Yay us. The evidence for this is shown in every single comment Dipper has made the past two pages. And most of yours as well. The only one who provides even a modicum of structured, sensible dabate here is Bravo.

Again. I am not taking Anitas side in anything here what so ever. I've argued against the other side as well. I never stated gaming journalism didn't need games. I said it did. But don't try to lecture me on what game dev thinks. I didn't want to bring it up, but I worked with several, both big and small. I argued with them in regards to this. I know some of the people who run PC gamer here in sweden. I know the entire team that made Amnesia, I talk the guys behind Secrets of Grindea, my friend works with the guys who made Magicka. I know plenty of EA personell, Sony people. I've worked directly with Biowares pr and art department- Really, never try to claim something as silly as to me not knowing what goes on within the process gamedevelopment. People know that fans make or break, not reviewers. And the reviewers that matter in most devs eyes are not the giants like IGN. It is people like Yahtzee, total buiscit. The guys who reach a ton of pesky, hard to please fans like you and me. And what scares them, is us. I know people who look at what Notch just did and goes. "I hope I make atleast a fraction of what he made, before i loose the will to work on my project." (I am curius, where are your sources. Who do you got on the inside? What gives you the gall to try and tell others to take a closer look on the industry. This time you barked up the wrong tree. Swallow your pride and admit when you are in the wrong, for once in your life.

Reviews are also a matter of personal taste, and what the reviewer hold the highest. So yes, conceptually good games that fall short are given higher scores then might seem warrented to you or me. But we do not have any right to hold them to that. To do so is do display a crazy level of selfentitlement, it really is. "YOu only gave it a high score becouse of LGBT content." for example. Can we prove that? No. Can we choose not to ever click on that persons reviews ever again; Yes. Yet some of the reviewers get hate male. For what, liking something you do not? That is fucking bizarre and sad.

You know who care the most about IGN and such? The big, big guys. Thats about it. If you make a good game, you are gonna get good reviews where it matters. The big game companies are the problem here. If their subdeveloper does not hit a certein score with the big review sites, they actually get deducted money. They are the ones fucked. Not the publisher, the developers.

And to qoute Brovos opinion on Anita. "She isn't a journalist. You do not make her honest. You can her." And all that's been achieved is to make her super controversial meaning that won't happen becouse she makes money of peoples missguided campaign against her.

Also, please, please stop using the word feminazi.I mean, It makes you look like a total goof. Its a overused slander. Nothing anita has done deserve it. Is she possibly a con? Yes. Is she a personal shill? Yes. Is she a felame superiority who screams that all men are pigs and need to die? No. That is not where her flaws lie, as many as they are,.

Hellis said Instead you strawman and put words that i didn't say and tried to derive a different meaning then what I stated.

...

YOu on the other hand, is being sympathetic towards criminal activity.

Uh-huh, I'm the one Strawmanning here. Got it.

Hellis said There was a actual, real and bomb threat, against a public building, over the fact that a woman doesn't agree with us and percieve a problem and might have exploited sympathy to sell her shit.

Me and Dipper have all referenced shit that's already been shared in this thread... Your building claim though? No where... Sorry, show the source or I'm not counting that as an argument.
Plus, how did you tell it as an 'actual' threat? Did they show up in the area, did they give away tons of personal info? Spam a personal phoneline? etc.

And no, don't give me that "All threats must be crushed the same" crap. You made the distinction this one was 'real', so show me why that distinction is valid.

Hellis said The moment, the very moment threats of pshysical violence comes up we have to take a stand against it if we are to be anywhere close to credible.

First, Dipper already pointed out how we do... So unless if you mean arresting every person who makes an online threat... You're crying for results you're already getting.

Hellis said And good job by the way, not at all adressing the fact the point that gamers drive gamedevs on the run aswell. See, the way people dogged bioware writing staff. It's a case of sheer entitlement.

No, that was a case of loyal fans following the series for years. Investing tons of money, time and praise into it. Only to have Bioware and EA consciously do a shit/half-assed job on the ending.

There is a HUGE different between "You can't make a game on this topic! Sexist Bastards!" and "Bioware! Stop making poor endings to games. I don't want to buy _____ product if it's going to let me down". Which is basic business, Bioware release sub-optimal product. Customer is displeased, customer voices this and is now less likely to buy future Bioware products. Bioware now goes "Oh... This is losing customers, let's not do that again".

That's not dogging, that's not scaring Dev's away. That's basic business, people will not buy a sub-optimal product and companies will be hesitant to release sub optimal product is their customers won't buy it.

+You really missed the fact that a lot of that anger was at EA for once again prioritizing money over game quality.
EA is constantly known for cheating people, and destroying franchises for a quick profit. EA has done this for a long time, they've built up a bad rep for it.
Just like calling out Anita for lying isn't sexist, calling out EA for being cheap is not dogging game companies or creating an US vs THEM mentality

Hellis said The evidence for this is shown in every single comment Dipper has made the past two pages. And most of yours as well. The only one who provides even a modicum of structured, sensible dabate here is Bravo.

*Brovo

But oh yes, the fact we disagree with you is proof we're wrong...
No, I'm sorry but not liking us or not agree with us doesn't make us wrong. It's not proof that you're right, it simply means we disagree.

I will give that Brovo is far more skilled at constructing arguments than most people (Me and Dipper and you included), but your bias here is that you like Brovo's delivery. Therefore he's right.
I'm sorry, but if you haven't been noticing, he's been arguing against you (and never against me and Dipper) this entire debate.

Not liking the delivery does not make us wrong, it just means you're apparently sensitive enough that you're now resorting to "I don't like you! You're wrong!".

Hellis said I never stated gaming journalism didn't need games.

I never said you did... o.O
Look, me saying ______ does not instantly mean I'm claiming you think the opposite.

When I say "Gaming needs more games" it strictly means that.
It does not mean "Gaming needs more games. And since this is my stance, Hellis is clearly the opposite of this".

Hellis said People know that fans make or break, not reviewers.

Um... yea. That's business 101, fans give them the money. It's the reviewers though who help point fans to or away from the game.
Obviously reviewers call ______ game awful, but all the fans buy it anyways then it's still a success. This was never argued.

But reviewers have pull, and when they take bribes to give false ratings, that diverts a section of the fans to or away certain games for false reasoning.
And when reviewers all join up and go "Games are sexist!" it creates bad press, bad press that brings in outside media, audiences etc.

Developers and Gaming gain bad reputations, this hurts sales, and in other cases such as say basing themselves off a war it causes media to demonize the game and scare of Publishers.

Hellis said And the reviewers that matter in most devs eyes are not the giants like IGN. It is people like Yahtzee, total buiscit.

In terms of sale numbers, but these are never the critics going around falsely attacking games or gamers for sexism.

So yes we can agree on the fact that people such as Total Biscuit influence more gamers decision to buy a game than say a site like Kotaku.
But Kotaku are the kinds of people twisting so many people to attack video games, to see video games as sexist, to think that gamers are all looking to give death threats.

So no, you don't get to ignore their effect because Total Biscuit and Yahtzee are successful channels.

Hellis said I am curius, where are your sources. Who do you got on the inside? What gives you the gall to try and tell others to take a closer look on the industry. This time you barked up the wrong tree. Swallow your pride and admit when you are in the wrong, for once in your life.

You do realize sources have been shared this entire thread right up until you barged in claiming us to be wrong.
Then it was really just you making unsourced arguments as to why we're wrong, and us using basic reasoning to show what that's flawed thinking.

And no, just because you claim to have talked to people in some companies before doesn't make you an expert.
You know what makes you an expert? Actually being one of those developers.

So no, you having friends doesn't suddenly add truth to your accusations.
But even as a developer, you need to rationally defend your point.
And strawmanning us, moving the goal post and simply saying "I'm wrong" doesn't make us wrong.

And I've admitted to being wrong plenty of times...
I'd be a Pro-Life, Anti-LGBT, Anti-Vaccine, Feminist Christian if I didn't.
But when I admit to being wrong is when I've been faced with logical arguments, not those aggressively made in an attempt to vilify people.
And a number of those changes I made were actually done in OT so your "For once if your life" comment either shows

a) A completely lack of knowledge of me and my activities in OT. In which case, stop talking like you know me.
b) Purposely ignoring info for being condescending.

Hellis said Reviews are also a matter of personal taste, and what the reviewer hold the highest. So yes, conceptually good games that fall short are given higher scores then might seem warrented to you or me. But we do not have any right to hold them to that. To do so is do display a crazy level of selfentitlement, it really is. "YOu only gave it a high score becouse of LGBT content." for example. Can we prove that? No. Can we choose not to ever click on that persons reviews ever again; Yes. Yet some of the reviewers get hate male. For what, liking something you do not? That is fucking bizarre and sad.

Um, once again completely missing the point (or purposely dodging it).
The criticism is about bribery may it be through money, sex, favors etc.

I also have never seen a case where a game got boosted reviews because of LGBT content. We're not arguing that we don't like a reviewer disagreeing with us, please stop saying this, and stop strawmanning. It's clear proof of corruption, bias etc. that we have issues with.

So if you can please stop taking legit worries, and twisting it into entitlement that would be great.

Hellis said Also, please, please stop using the word feminazi.I mean, It makes you look like a total goof. Its a overused slander. Nothing anita has done deserve it. Is she possibly a con? Yes. Is she a personal shill? Yes. Is she a felame superiority who screams that all men are pigs and need to die? No. That is not where her flaws lie, as many as they are,.

Oh sorry, would you rather I go back to saying "I'm sick of feminism/feminsit's?"

Except... you bitched at me earlier where I had to clarify I meant a specific kind of feminists, since the feminazi terms.
Hellis make up your mind, you either want me to simply say "I don't like feminism" or you want me to use a term that more accurately describes the kinds of people I have issue with.
You don't get to bitch about both.

Soia there even a point in debating this with you Hellis, or are you going to just keep doing mental gymnastics and taking what everyone said out of context while defending someone from all critisim, while pretending you are against them? Because every post you've made has been that.

Dipper said
Soia there even a point in debating this with you Hellis, or are you going to just keep doing mental gymnastics and taking what everyone said out of context while defending someone from all critisim, while pretending you are against them? Because every post you've made has been that.

[2]
I'm basically ready to say "Your posts will be treated as non-existent until you stop vilifying one side and making the other immune from criticism".

Also, yes, the proof is 'circumstancial', in that her pic of "OH NOIM HARASSED" was taken 15 seconds after the final post, while logged out of an account.

She didn't file a police report, two journalists have proven that already. Also, she retweeted CHILD.FUXKING.PORN. in an attempt to gain sympathy, THAT is why FBI are involved.

I have a pic somewhere about how she acts. When I find it, I'll post it.

Wait, hold on, video games are supposed to be art?