This whole thing should have been over a week ago.
All the major sites involved had to do was a give a statement on what had actually been going on the last couple weeks. Establish some rules for their writers to keep things professional with developers (that WAS the problem here. Not feminism, not harassment, not any of that) and things could have gone back to normal, more or less. Hell, Kotaku actually DID that and then rejoined the idiot brigade.
In an effort to... shut people up, I guess?... eight major sites published articles about how “gamers” were at fault more or less simultaneously. This spurred HUGE backlash because it was an obvious attempt to divert the issue from their own corruption. People are calling it “gamergate.” I really wish they were a bit more creative but… oh well.
To very quickly give my perspective on it: this is the end result of the internet allowing “blogs” to become “news.” Our site’s DragonKnight wrote a pretty good (and, dare I say, journalistic) blog a while back about how most “game journalists” actually don’t meet the standard of journalistic ethics. (I don’t agree with every little thing he says in it, I often disagree with him on many issues, but that thesis is a major exception.) I myself am drafting an article looking at how the system was doomed from the start. That’ll be here once emotions aren’t running as high.
So, yes, I am joining in taking a stand against these sites for trying to twist the whole affair into another “hateful gamers” story. Harassment and (yes, I think) sexism are real problems in internet culture. However, this tactic will only hurt the credibility of people who care about such issues in the future. Yes, I care about progress. I believe games and all media have the power to spur social change. But, integrity needs to be our foundation for any of it to last.
But what I wanted to do today was briefly call out a problem I’ve seen coming from “my side” and that’s people not outing the unethical practices of some critics, but just bashing their stances and opinions. Because, by doing that, you play right into your enemy’s hand.
I’ve often butted heads here on “social justice” stuff, (don’t care for that term either. Social justice originally meant more tangible issues like poverty) but my outlook has changed somewhat on the issues in the wake of all this. Or rather, I think a little differently about how they should be reported. I still think there are important discussions to have about cultural issues and gaming. However, I’m now willing to admit that some sites were REALLY straining things when they posted on the issue. For instance, a Polygon writer called that Kim Kardashian game “the most progressive game of the year” just because it allows for homosexual relationships. Good on someone for trying to find the sliver of decency in a cancer on American pop culture, but come on! It’s so obvious they’re just trying to be contradictory by heaping praise on such a reviled game. There are little indie games that allow for such things coming out all the time. You could have said the same thing about “Always Sometimes Monsters” which lets the player choose from a huge variety of characters for both their avatar and their love interests, regardless of gender and race. And that was a title that actually could have used exposure. (Not a great game, but there's a potential audience that might not have heard about it.)
(DISCLAIMER: have not played the Kardashian game. Maybe it IS okay for all I know, but I feel my brain rotting just by looking at screenshots.)
Now, that brings me to what I wanted to call out on “our side.” I’m seeing a lot of backlash to critics, not for actual corruption, but for their opinions on certain games or those aforementioned social issues.
One game frequently being brought up is Gone Home. Now, I wrote on Gone Home myself, saying it was a well-crafted and worthwhile experience, but that it didn’t really capture what I love about the medium. But I appended the caveat that it didn’t need to meet “my definition of a game.”
Recently though, I’ve seen a number of posts holding its positive reception up as an example of the “corruption” in games media. And some are saying that critics wouldn’t have cared if the story didn’t involve LGBT issues. Sorry, but having a different outlook on games or social issues is not “corruption.” That’s how opinions are formed. In fact, professional critics in all media have a lot of differing opinions from its average consumers. I’m not a fan of saying “it’s an opinion; opinions can’t be wrong” because opinions can be based on misinformation and a lack of experience (As I said in an older blog post of mine about a review of Borderlands 2) but an unpopular opinion isn’t something we should be unifying and rallying against.
Also, on the LGBT angle. As someone who often digs into the indie scene, I can tell you it’s not uncommon AT ALL among indie games to be inclusive and cover such topics. The Hateful Days series which I compared Gone Home to deals with even more of the same stuff: Hate Plus featured a bisexual heroine; “preferred pronoun” options for the player; the tragic love stories of not one, but two homosexual couples; and a pretty gut-wrenching story about a woman being nearly raped by a coworker. And the whole plot is basically about how women could still lose all their rights in a supposedly enlightened and equal society. And that society in the game so closely mirrors USA’s current political landscape that I’m surprised its leader’s name isn’t “Amabo Kcarab.” If agreeing politically with critics is all it takes to get praise, you would have heard no end of this game.
And as a bit more recent example, we’re now seeing the very LGBT-friendly Sims 4 get thoroughly slammed by critics.
My point being: sorry, but Gone Home did have a lot of actual effort, good production and writing put into it that actually earned its high marks. (This is not to discredit any claims of an actual conflict of interest with specific critics.)
What I think I’m seeing are a lot of people who generally don’t like “art” games seeing an opportunity to take the fight to those games and the “hipster critics” who dare to find any enjoyment in them. The same goes for people who were sick of seeing “social criticism” from these websites who think that now we can shut THAT up for good too.
But even if I agreed that Gone Home deserved scorn; even if I didn’t think its backlash was only a tad more credible than pre-teen girls whining that Twilight’s metascore isn’t higher; even if I didn’t think the discussion of social issues and games was important; I could not allow that or other “art games” to be dragged into the discussion. Why? Because it’s what “the other side” wants.
The sites behind “gamergate” are the ones trying to make the narrative “gamers vs feminists” and “gamers vs social criticism” and “gamers vs any change in their medium.” Because that’s what they’ve convinced themselves it is and how they want others to see it. By posting stuff along those lines, we reinforce those narratives, playing into their hand. And the people who want to see “art games” and “social justice critics” go away are going to sabotage your side unintentionally. In fact, given the crazy crap that led up to this, I wouldn’t be surprised if there “double agents” trying to drum up hate for feminists and “artsy games” on the “gamer” side of things so that they can exploit it.
Stay on target. Don’t allow anyone on “either side” to succeed in twisting the discussion. Talk about what’s actually at stake. It’s not “Gamers vs. Feminist Critics,” it’s not “Gamers vs. Controversial Critics,” it’s not “Gamers vs. hipster indie games,” it’s “Gamers vs. Corrupt Journalism.” Plain and simple. (And it’s not even just “gamers” at this point. All kinds of people from all corners of media have come out of the woodworks for this.)
And I realize how paranoid that “double agent” thing sounds, but I swear, I was NOT like this a couple weeks ago. That’s just how insane things have gotten and the effect it’s had on my (I like to think) usually calm mind. Hell, man, I’m almost willing to believe that Zoe Quinn was the one who leaked all those celebrity nudes as a distraction.
I will now hear your reactions as I imagine them:
“But I like traditional games! I don’t wanna see more of these ‘walking simulators’.”
Why would other things go away because something different is succeeding? Yes, there is a cycle of successful games spawning imitators throughout gaming history. But “cycle” is the key word there: the public eats it up for a bit and then loses interest. And that cycle moves faster than ever now, especially in the indie market. Also, what I’ve noticed is that those imitators seem to pop up only on their “tier.” For instance, Slender was a super-popular budget indie horror game. The result was a slew of similar budget indie horror games, but did the big guys – Nintendo, Ubisoft, 2K, EA – drop EVERYTHING to make a procedurally generated horror? No. We still got our Marios and our Halos and our Assassin’s Creeds. You just saw a bunch of “me too” indie games until consumers got wise to the genre and lost interest. (I think we’re seeing the downward curve of the “X Simulator” now as well)
Hell, remember when FarmVille clones were gonna be the death of “real games?” How’s Zynga doing right now? Yeah. Not good.
Besides, if Spec Ops: The Line didn’t immediately cease production on all military shooters, I don’t know what would.
“I still don’t think all this LGBT and feminist stuff is important. I don’t wanna hear about it from game sites anymore.”
That’s fine that you feel that way. I could care less right now and it really is not the time for me to convince you otherwise. But even if you’re just “tired of hearing about it,” there are genuinely hateful people out there who agree with you for all the wrong reasons. People you don’t want to end up grouped with.
For example, if you’re an American who doesn’t care for our current president you probably don’t want to have Klan members representing you. You open up a similar can of worms by trying to fight “social criticism” in the heat of all this other stuff.
And if you think the problem is “they’re all reporting that stuff for hits,” well, then, don’t give those articles attention. And, at least on this site, that means not driving up the heat by saying “not giving it the hits” in the comments. That and it always just BAFFLED me how people own accounts on sites to do nothing but complain about what gets posted.
(And I would REEEEEALLY prefer it if we avoided debating gay rights and stuff in the comments, if you can restrain yourselves)
“But we still have these critics whose attitudes don’t reflect the gaming public!”
… so?
It’s not a critic’s job to “speak for the audience” and that seems to be something the internet (not just gamers!) have trouble grasping. And, as I said, it’s the case with most media. Yes, some of them can be overzealous with political issues as I mentioned; but the problem here is not the honest critics sharing their opinion nobody has to agree with. It’s the critics calling themselves “journalists” who report based on their opinions, not on fact.
Even if we topple the entire “games journalism” complex, and replace every single current writer online, that *particular* schism between “the average consumer” and critics will never go away.
“Damn straight! We gotta show all these dumb “social justice” f**ks that THEY’RE the real bad guys here.”
Woah! Slow down there, buddy. Just some general advice, but, ironically, it’s more important the more heated the discussion gets. Being right is not a free pass to be a jerk to the other side. Even “the other side being a jerk” is not a free pass to be a jerk. We need to rise above that. I think most people “against” us are merely uninformed about what’s really going on. And by antagonizing them, we just push them further away.
Look at me: I’m usually all about how awful people are to each other online. I think it’s a huge problem. By default, I should have been on the “other side” of things. I didn’t ally with “gamers” because somebody made me feel like the bad guy. I did so because I had the evidence presented plainly to me.
And isn’t a big part of the problem now that people were choosing to antagonize each other rather than present the facts?
“I’m just so sick of this whole argument…”
Oh God, me too! *internet hugs*
I’m so exhausted by this. I just wanna talk about games again. I wanna talk about how Layton vs. Wright is freaking amazeballs. I wanna talk about how Diablo 3 is actually fun now. I wanna talk about how Shovel Knight is authentically retro, but doesn’t use pixels as a crutch like so many other indie games. I wanna talk about stupid box art and funny glitches and crappy endings. (I wanna talk about how “wanna” isn’t recognized by spellcheck but “amazeballs” is somehow.) I’d give anything at this point to skip all this and go back to arguing about Samus’s new Zero Suit in Smash Bros. That was FUN by comparison!
All I can say is remember who is at fault. Don’t ever feel like “we gamers” are the ones responsible for all this fighting. The sites responsible have the power to stop this by fessing up. Keep up the pressure, because I bet the second one of them caves and confesses, the whole thing will come crashing down around them.
And, on the off chance any writers on such a site read this. I know you don’t wanna lose your job, and you’re scared of the backlash, but I think most reasonable people would really respect you for coming forward. Obviously, you couldn’t write on your site, but they can’t shut you up on Twitter. And I know respect doesn’t pay the bills but, well, 4chan raised tens of thousands of dollars for a feminist game jam in the heat of all this… so, hell, you seeing some generosity come your way would be far from the strangest thing to happen in the last couple weeks. For what it’s worth, I know I’d chip in.
Thanks for reading. Sincerely. Keep fighting the good fight, and keep the fight good.
An existing community manager for Helldivers 2 has acknowledged the 'unfortunate' departure of Spitz following the whole PSN fiasco.
From what I see on Reddit, a lot of fans also hate him... it is just a guy that like the stir shits up, it is not good for both the Arrowheads and the fans.
I think he just got fed up by people's complaining and accidentally spilled the beans
Ya, but unfortunately that's the nature of the job, you can't get emotional, he represents the company.
Wccftech discussed the recent Xbox news with MIDiA Research analyst Rhys Elliott, who pointed out that a strong upcoming Games Showcase could help a lot with fans.
I was hoping for something different from Coalition, not Gears 6 so soon.
Their expertise in UE development could've propelled them to try out other IPs using the new UE5.
But guess, given recent MS' state, Gears 6 was the 'safer' call for the studio. But still hope they venture other IPs or even other genres ... at least FPSs in future?
Microsoft seems only interested in maximizing profits through its biggest IPs at this point.
So soon? Its been 5 years since Gears 5, longest gap between games in the franchise.
Why would people be less angry? If MS made it's own games instead of buying up what was already available then we wouldn't be in the situation that everyone is angry at.
MS is the problem.
Everybody pays for or uses MS in some form personally or professionally. If that’s considered supporting, it hasn’t been helping Xbox.
Fuck MS and Phil. I already told that shit bag off on Twitter, if the dumb ass responds I highly doubt it, I will go off much worse. What a fucking disgrace MS and Phil are to the gaming community.
Akimbot is an upcoming sci-fi action-platformer that shows its inspiration from games of the past.
Same. I am a big fan of the series and feel it is criminally underappreciated by the community at large.
I like the bit where you brought up Samus. You see Shulk's bathing suit outfit in Smash? I had to laugh when I saw that because it made the Samus debate look so silly. Anyway, I really liked this blog talking about what's great about #gamergate and also taking the time to point out some not so great things about the more extreme minority of the group. I like people taking the stance of fighting with words and facts over bullying and harassment. If gamers want to prove we're not all lifeless bums and anti-women jerks, they can do it with hard evidence because that is on the side of the gamers.
I think Internet Aristocrat has nailed it and if you haven't already done so, go watch his videos on Anita Sarkessian and recently, Zoe Quinn.
These people have basically hijacked our hobby, something some of us have been loving since the 80's. A hobby that Anita has openly admitted to not even enjoying in one of her lectures. Thanks to the internet and social media they have formed a cliché within the industry, something that is practically untouchable and it's changing the landscape to an extent where there is constant controversy.
You may think that these people are not an issue, that if you ignore them they will disappear but that isn't the case sadly. They are changing things, they are affecting how developers are perceived and dictating what they should be creating to appease their agendas.
The real kicker here is they are ruining our hobby, becoming spokesman for the industry and getting rich off the back of it.
It's alright to criticize; it's not alright to attempt to steer/control/blackmail developers into making your politically motivated content. Gamergate should have been over a week ago, but I'm glad it isn't. The longer it goes on, the better of a chance it has of getting into actual media; about how these "journalists" (or rather bloggers) are corrupt. I for one am tired of people such as FemFreq going out of their way to create drama where it doesn't exist (look at her calling Hitman: Absolution misogynistic, when it reality, she went out of her way to do that which the game punishes you for). I'm tired of these people trying to change game series into their own twisted little fantasies of how they view the world.
Hopefully once these corrupt paid bloggers are out of the industry and some standards are set, the corporations that are milking consumers with their unfair practices can be changed next.
Very well said. I agree that GamerGate shouldn't be derailed and we have to be careful to call out those attempting not only to claim that it's about hate, misogyny, and exclusion, but also those who make it look like that's what it's about.
It's not about that. It's about many different topics. From corruption and nepotism, to manipulation and monopolization of discourse that paints all gamers as exclusionary and regressive people actively trying to keep people out.
I asked on Twitter "Does anyone think that gaming could have survived 40 years by excluding women?" and you can imagine the kind of hate I got just for asking that question. I've lost count how many times I was called "rapey" for that question.
If people want to discuss social topics as they relate to gaming, the first thing they need to do is to understand that what they consider a social issue isn't what everyone considers a social issue, it's also not something everyone is particularly concerned with, and they have no right to essentially insult millions of gamers and game developers in the name of discussing their agenda.
And they also must remember that you can't discuss one side and not the other. To make the claim that gaming is misogynist while blatantly ignoring how many games have you completely disregarding male life just shows the huge double standard.
Games have always been about fun. The minute people start inserting their own meanings into games and trying to make a huge deal out of those meanings is when we all suffer for it.
I use this example all the time, but it's still true. Just because an author may describe blue curtains in his/her book, doesn't mean the author meant for you to think that he/she was conveying sadness or depression. He/she could just like the color blue.
I came here not knowing what to expect and came away pleasantly surprised. Although I don't likely agree with some things, or perhaps disagree about their severity - that's really not the point. It's not about someone's opinion being right or wrong or better than another people's - everyone places value in different things and has a different moral and social compass.
Again, I'm going to say, measured responses like this which mention the issues at hand and try to control the rabid hate floating around are the *only* solution which reflects well on gamers and has *any* hope of achieving what everyone's claiming is their long term goal. Patience and clear points are how you'll get this stuff noticed and respected by anyone outside the angry echo chamber.
What they'll do with it at that point is another question. I would think it's more important to be heard than to be proven totally right. (which is never going to happen is you can't convince 100% of people of anything.. People still deny evolution and the moon landings FFS) Hardly anyone is approaching this with the level of nuance it deserves. Nobody should be getting vilified or painted as people who are "out to spoil things". (other than the trolls and abusers, they deserve it) That's not what they're attempting at all. The witch hunt attitude needs to stop.