Corruption in gaming journalism discussion and update thread. - General

That's not the point, and you're really mistaken if you think they don't pay close attention to him. Even a single person who reads one of his tweets can tell all his friends about it, then all their friends, and so on. Information gets along somehow, it's the internet age. Within four days I wouldn't be surprised if they felt that could be used as ammunition against them.

[QUOTE=Denicide;46210708]I highly doubt people have the time to follow every tweet by TotalBiscuit so closely, nor do I think the readers of Kotaku or RPS are going to stop reading because they didn't cover a game.[/QUOTE] For all we know, they could have hired someone to skim through his tweets. And them ignoring the game could have brought some backlash if people pointed out the bullshit behind the blacklisting.

[QUOTE=EmperorVagak;46210689][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/dptaEKp.png[/IMG] October 4: TotalBiscuit said he'd take a look at the game. Both articles: Created on October 8. I dunno, they might have just created those articles out of fear, but that's just my guess.[/QUOTE] The trailer featured in both of the articles was uploaded Oct. 7, after the tweet and a day before the articles were published. Kotaku and RPS have also covered the game previously in February, which coincided with Kingdome Come's last official trailer release. It seems like the articles came about more due to the trailer than TotalBiscuit's tweet, especially considering that most coverage of games in the press is tied around trailers and interviews.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/I8ulTky.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Wowza!;46210845]The trailer featured in both of the articles was uploaded Oct. 7, a day before the articles were published. Kotaku and RPS have also covered the game previously in February, which coincided with Kingdome Come's last official trailer release. It seems like the articles came about more due to the trailer than TotalBiscuit's tweet, especially considering that most coverage of games in the press is tied around trailers and interviews.[/QUOTE] Point given. [QUOTE=Stents*;46210871][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/I8ulTky.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] He brought up the "man card", some sort of imaginary card to prove that you're "manly" goes against the whole concept of equality, where it shouldn't be required for you to be "manly". yeah, okay.

[QUOTE=Stents*;46210871][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/I8ulTky.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] And here we see the wild white knight. He extravagantly flaunts his manliness in order to protect the women he thinks are under attack, while at the same time providing comedic material for outsiders. Crikey.

[QUOTE=Stents*;46210871][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/I8ulTky.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] I wonder if the opposition will complain about his gendered insults.

[QUOTE=xxncxx;46210947]And here we see the wild white knight. He extravagantly flaunts his manliness in order to protect the women he thinks are under attack, while at the same time providing comedic material for outsiders. Crikey.[/QUOTE]Can I have one as a pet? Can I? Can I? Can I? I've always wanted an annoying pet that angrily and hatefully barks at "intruders." :v:

[QUOTE=Wowza!;46210845]The trailer featured in both of the articles was uploaded Oct. 7, after the tweet and a day before the articles were published. Kotaku and RPS have also covered the game previously in February, which coincided with Kingdome Come's last official trailer release. It seems like the articles came about more due to the trailer than TotalBiscuit's tweet, especially considering that most coverage of games in the press is tied around trailers and interviews.[/QUOTE] I was talking about Gamastutra blacklisting Kingdom Come, not RPS or Kotaku: The last post about King Come by Gamastutra was in april: [url]http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DanielVavra/20140402/214506/Whats_next_for_Kingdom_Come_Deliverance.php[/url] They blacklisted it after that and they also deleted this guy's articles: [url]http://apgnation.com/archives/2014/10/08/8236/blacklisted-by-gamasutra-an-interview-with-slade-villena[/url] The RPS article for kingdom's come is alright, the kotaku articles on the other hand... [url]http://kotaku.com/idiots-fight-to-keep-a-medieval-game-white-1516970808[/url]. TL;DR Gamasutra blacklists articles about things they don't like because they are mostly made up by freelance bloggers, Kotaku just shits on things. RPS just doesn't do research and follows whatever Kotaku is doing. The core factor is that they all shit on specific developers in order to push an idea of what they think is more morally correct. That would be fine if the games they were purporting as "revolutionary" weren't complete pieces of shit like depression quest and revolution 60 and they weren't ignorantly bashing actually good games for stupid and incoherent reasons.

I stopped following this whole thing around the time 4free janitors started banning people for talking about GG. Can someone please link a video or a summary of big shit that's happened?

[QUOTE=tempunary;46211143]I stopped following this whole thing around the time 4free janitors started banning people for talking about GG. Can someone please link a video or a summary of big shit that's happened?[/QUOTE] [video=youtube;ipcWm4B3EU4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipcWm4B3EU4[/video] Other than that it's just been people like Brianna Wu who are ZQ-wannabies using similar tactics to advertise their games and more articles by gaming and technology websites bashing gamers. The thunderclap, a mass twitter and facebook "I support GamerGate" post that tens of thousands of people posted all at once, happened. I don't think it had much effect though. Also TB survived cancer treatment.

[QUOTE=tempunary;46211143]I stopped following this whole thing around the time 4free janitors started banning people for talking about GG. Can someone please link a video or a summary of big shit that's happened?[/QUOTE]This video is probably the most succinct description you can get. [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipcWm4B3EU4[/url]

[QUOTE=Zyler;46211135]I was talking about Gamastutra blacklisting Kingdom Come, not RPS or Kotaku: The last post about King Come by Gamastutra was in april: [URL]http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DanielVavra/20140402/214506/Whats_next_for_Kingdom_Come_Deliverance.php[/URL] They blacklisted it after that and they also deleted this guy's articles: [URL]http://apgnation.com/archives/2014/10/08/8236/blacklisted-by-gamasutra-an-interview-with-slade-villena[/URL] The RPS article for kingdom's come is alright, the kotaku articles on the other hand... [URL]http://kotaku.com/idiots-fight-to-keep-a-medieval-game-white-1516970808[/URL]. TL;DR Gamasutra blacklists articles about things they don't like because they are mostly made up by freelance bloggers, Kotaku just shits on things. RPS just doesn't do research and follows whatever Kotaku is doing. The core factor is that they all shit on specific developers in order to push an idea of what they think is more morally correct. That would be fine if the games they were purporting as "revolutionary" weren't complete pieces of shit like depression quest and revolution 60 and they weren't ignorantly bashing actually good games for stupid and incoherent reasons.[/QUOTE] I can't find anything in the interview link that says that Gamasutra blacklisted the game. Gamasutra's articles focus more on industry news and game developer resources than game trailers and promotion, so it's not unusual that they would stop reporting on a game. Also, the Kotaku article isn't criticizing the game or the developers, but the actions of Reddit posters: [QUOTE]I call these folks idiots not for their "arguments" - the game takes place in a small area of medieval Bohemia, so there are good odds everyone would have been white anyway - but because of their hair-trigger hostility, and the extent with which they feel entitled to lash out and threaten others. Nobody told the developers to change the game. Nobody officially complained. All that happened was that somebody, somewhere asked an interesting question, one that happened to involve non-whites in a [I]very [/I]white setting.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Thlis;46209964]Is it just me or is there some sort of verbal trend going around where people will say "Gamergate started out with good intentions but now" ? It really baffles me because I have no idea what the "but now" is. Things have been progressively getting better. It shifted from Zoe Quinn to a games journalism discussion where doxxing and harassment is discouraged (at least by one side). I feel like it just says "Well in hind sight I cant argue with it but I am too much of a coward to say I agree or disagree with it"[/QUOTE] [URL="http://mindlesszombiestudios.com/content/resisting-narrative-shift"]It seems to be somewhat organised, to discredit #GamerGate.[/URL] I think someone called it [I]"Gamers are Dead" 2.0[/I], which seems apt. I think people are trying to push this by publishing articles that aren't [I]quite[/I] completely insulting this time around.

[QUOTE=Denicide;46207559]A problem (really, the problem) with GamerGate is that half-post there and especially "games should not be politicized." Games are political from their creation and it's daft to suggest that they don't present certain worldviews in even the most abstract games. This debate goes on endlessly, so I'll just leave a good Errant Signal video below which kind of preempts the whole ordeal by a few months (not least in his dislike of the term gamer). [video=youtube;7_tdztHiyiE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_tdztHiyiE[/video] With that video in mind, it's equally silly to suggest that some people are "prejudiced" unless the statement includes the disclaimer that [I]all [/I]people are prejudiced. Yes, of course, people wouldn't bring their political philosophy to reviewing a washing machine but if you believe games can be critiqued at the same level as books, movies, visual art then of course people will dissect how this or that group is represented or what message this system sends. It sells games short to say that they aren't political since it may as well read "games are just toys."[/QUOTE] Generalized semantics, and hardly. The entertainment industry is quite political in two spheres >generally, behind the scenes >and then thematically, front and center through produced material but there is still very clear separation of church and state. That games reflect society and the values thereof speaks nothing to the point either. Your point is about as salient as "people breathe air, so air should be be given a slant and made an issue because that's what people do". Sorry but literalistic semantics aren't going to win anything here. There is a clear dividing line between making a point with within a story with political or topical bias and cultural engineering, one is an accepted method of discourse that has been used since people started using storytelling as more than a passing of time, and the other has never been used for the public/cultural good as far as I know. Your literalist take on the word prejudiced is equally a circular non-argument. That human beings absorb information in discrete formulated patterns and form biased value assessments and tiered judgements based on and from them is biological fact, that fact has nothing to do with say, Leigh Alexander's shitty ass behavior. Her behavior speaks for itself, and has no place in gaming, and neither does any other political engineering. You think this thread got to this many pages by a "natural progression"? This thread exists because people are attempting to obfuscate the truth for [I]political[/I] ends. [editline]12th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Thlis;46210334]Wasn't that what they said about gamers during the ME3 controversy? Journalists calling gamers entitled.[/QUOTE] You realize that was part of this then? You think ME3 getting 70 "awards" and the same journalists now under fire for collusion and lying giving it perfect scores [I]before they finished the game[/I] was coincidence? You think that fact it dropped over 80% the second week in sales and was the most returned/traded in game in Gamestop history are equally unrelated? Like I said, this has been going on for far longer and is far broader than people think it is, and about 40% of the people involved on both sides (dev/journalist) live in Edmonton, Toronto and Montreal. You think DA2's schizophrenic social interactions were because of rushed production? You think BWE being the source of the first "professional" #AGG article after the blowup was coincidence? Nope. (note: the "you" in that isn't personal) [QUOTE=Denicide;46208761]Isn't the 'point' of GG that the feminist agenda is everywhere, though? The most valid frustrations are from people who believe they don't have a games media outlet that caters to their tastes, and now you seem to be extending this further. If there are only a few sites publishing feminist critique then you're really shooting your own movement in the foot. I mean, you have no reason to visit those places and consequentially they don't harm you in any way.[/QUOTE] Feminism and GG are PART of an equation. You need to start doing some research, feminism is one facet of #GG, a piece, not even kind of the whole, unless you're simply trying to derail the topic into that, in which case you're pretty abysmal at it.

[QUOTE=Zyler;46211196][video=youtube;ipcWm4B3EU4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipcWm4B3EU4[/video] Other than that it's just been people like Brianna Wu who are ZQ-wannabies using similar tactics to advertise their games and more articles by gaming and technology websites bashing gamers. The thunderclap, a mass twitter and facebook "I support GamerGate" post that tens of thousands of people posted all at once, happened. I don't think it had much effect though. Also TB survived cancer treatment.[/QUOTE] This video should go in the OP, unless for some reason OP is uneditable.

[QUOTE=Athlias;46211458]This video should go in the OP, unless for some reason OP is uneditable.[/QUOTE] It should be editable, the advanced reply function works correctly. If not then someone can use quick reply to get the post minus any quotes.

[QUOTE=Tamschi;46211378][URL="http://mindlesszombiestudios.com/content/resisting-narrative-shift"]It seems to be somewhat organised, to discredit #GamerGate.[/URL] I think someone called it [I]"Gamers are Dead" 2.0[/I], which seems apt. I think people are trying to push this by publishing articles that aren't [I]quite[/I] completely insulting this time around.[/QUOTE] Most likely false, stuff like calling people "heroes" and etc. Either that, or whoever wrote it has the wrong idea set. [editline]12th October 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=27X;46211379] Feminism and GG are PART of an equation. You need to start doing some research, feminism is one facet of #GG, a piece, not even kind of the whole, unless you're simply trying to derail the topic into that, in which case you're pretty abysmal at it.[/QUOTE] To be honest, I don't know how the fuck feminism even got caught in the first place. Zoe Quinn wasn't even a really radical feminist, it just seemed to be thrown around after other random people unrelated to the whole thing started getting threat(s?)

[QUOTE=Tamschi;46211515]It should be editable, the advanced reply function works correctly. If not then someone can use quick reply to get the post minus any quotes.[/QUOTE] Ive been having a consistent lack of internet for most of the past few weeks due to personal reasons, just got back for the weekend, so i havent had the chance to add it. I'll do so now.

[QUOTE=Stents*;46210871][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/I8ulTky.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] Sure I believe that someone with an online username "shinobijedi" and an anime avatar is a pinnacle of masculinity, sexual charm and is the life of the party. I can't be the only one who finds it ironic that most of the insults coming from the anti-GG crowd are aimed at attacking (perceived of course, because the perception is that GG could only possibly be pushed by straight white males) men's masculinity, or their social value, yet those insults are almost always spouted most vehemently by people who by their own admittance, don't fit in socially, and when they are men, are by any definition of the word, not very traditionally masculine. to cop an overused term, projection?

Blimey O Reilly, Matt Lees is being a real arse about this. I'm a little bit ashamed to share my handle with him.

[QUOTE=EmperorVagak;46210689][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/dptaEKp.png[/IMG] October 4: TotalBiscuit said he'd take a look at the game. Both articles: Created on October 8. I dunno, they might have just created those articles out of fear, but that's just my guess.[/QUOTE] Your guess isn't far off... Gawker and RPS get slammed, Gawker starts using their "hard" "news" site to slam GG, and RPS starts posting "OMGHAVEYOUGAIS HERDS OF REPUBIC COWOMANDOS AND DRAK MESSIAHS< THEY AM SOOOO KEEEEWL" Odd. From "gamers are the devil" to "omg have you heard of these super obscure cult games only gamers love to death"... hrm. I'm sure it's just an incredibly coincidental coincidence.

Regular retweets of Leigh Alexander, whilst saying that GG is a harassment movement 100% definite because a small amount of people are being dickheads under the banner. Sometimes, I wish this hashtag had never fucking started. [editline]12th October 2014[/editline] Oops, automerge- I was referring to Matt Lees.

[QUOTE=Stents*;46210871][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/I8ulTky.png[/IMG][/QUOTE] If you bring it up, it'll be defended as "bah, that was just attempting to talk to *them* on the language *they* should understand".

[QUOTE=Reimu;46210319]Personally, I thought it was a good idea. Especially since a lot of us have interesting/useful viewpoints.[/QUOTE] Anyone else?

[QUOTE=27X;46211379]Generalized semantics, and hardly. The entertainment industry is quite political in two spheres >generally, behind the scenes >and then thematically, front and center through produced material but there is still very clear separation of church and state. That games reflect society and the values thereof speaks nothing to the point either. Your point is about as salient as "people breathe air, so air should be be given a slant and made an issue because that's what people do". Sorry but literalistic semantics aren't going to win anything here. There is a clear dividing line between making a point with within a story with political or topical bias and cultural engineering, one is an accepted method of discourse that has been used since people started using storytelling as more than a passing of time, and the other has never been used for the public/cultural good as far as I know. Your literalist take on the word prejudiced is equally a circular non-argument. That human beings absorb information in discrete formulated patterns and form biased value assessments and tiered judgements based on and from them is biological fact, that fact has nothing to do with say, Leigh Alexander's shitty ass behavior. Her behavior speaks for itself, and has no place in gaming, and neither does any other political engineering. You think this thread got to this many pages by a "natural progression"? This thread exists because people are attempting to obfuscate the truth for [I]political[/I] ends. [/QUOTE] The behind the scenes politics and the 'front and centre' politics of the industry are one in the same. Decisions made by businesspeople influence how games are created and likewise decisions in a game's creation influence how it is marketed. To take a recent and obvious example in Hollywood cinema: it is no coincidence that there is a huge influx of American movies set in part in China. The Chinese market is gigantic and moviemakers will do what they can to capture that (or the wider SE Asia). Moreover, it's not enough to say that games reflect the society and the values they are produced in. It would be more accurate to say that games (and art in general) distorts the society and values they are produced in: the ideology of the people making a piece of art finds its way into the finished piece, consciously or not. Insofar as your accusation of 'cultural engineering' goes, I don't think that holds water if you believe games are political products. Say you are a reviewer and the newest AAA action game lands on your desk. The game consists of killing brown people and rescuing scantily clad women (I don't think that's terribly far fetched). You may very well decide not to mention the killing of brown people or the fact that you rescue modern damsels in distress but the truth is that, too, is a political decision. You've made a judgement about what is valuable for your readers and what is important about the game no less than someone who condemns both. More broadly, feminist (or any kind of) critique doesn't qualify as 'cultural engineering' (a term devalued by this movement almost as much as 'cultural Marxism') and it absolutely is an accepted method of discourse everywhere except videogames. Academic and much of popular criticism of novels, movies, plays, paintings, even music, relies on the understanding that the person giving the critique is doing it from a unique perspective. They are not merely trying to assess the game on some arbitrary line of objectivity and stamp it with a 1-10. Not only is it used for public/cultural good, it's vital to thinking about games in a better way than a review score measured on a scale of imagined objectivity ever could. Finally: "This thread exists because people are attempting to obfuscate the truth for [I]political [/I]ends." That is certainly true. It's true, too, though, that the people in this thread have (often differing) political agendas of their own, and, hey, disliking a type of critique (even more so if you want that whole type of critique to go away) is inherently and obviously political.

[QUOTE=Helelos;46208286][url]http://imgur.com/qNwlywW[/url] Jim is like a bull in a glass teashop complaining that people keep breaking the fine goods.[/QUOTE] I find it more interesting that Jim refuses to call Leigh on her bullshit and instead says "She's perfectly fucking ethical and a damn fine writer" while not mentioning that he's friends with her for at least more than a year. [QUOTE=Ithon;46212858]Anyone else?[/QUOTE] You mean "chat" as in voice chat? Like the Kotaku in Action thing? I'd love that.

[QUOTE=Te Great Skeeve;46211628]Most likely false, stuff like calling people "heroes" and etc. Either that, or whoever wrote it has the wrong idea set.[/QUOTE] Right, it's definitely over the top. However, the narrative shift is something I've definitely seen.

[QUOTE=Denicide;46213519]That is certainly true. It's true, too, though, that the people in this thread have (often differing) political agendas of their own, and, hey, disliking a type of critique (even more so if you want that whole type of critique to go away) is inherently and obviously political.[/QUOTE] I don't think you can call wanting more transparency in the press a political agenda, and that's what a lot of people in this thread care about.

[QUOTE=Eonart;46214551]About a day late but... [URL="https://twitter.com/FartToContinue/status/520964815230345217"]*whistle whistle*[/URL] The pictured account is already suspended. Dude says he's not scared of any trespassers so he doesn't care to leave his address up.[/QUOTE] It's Fart. He has been doxed a while ago. Plus he spends his better days harassing Dodger. [url]http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s2fjne[/url]