• PC Gamer: Let’s stop calling ourselves the “PC Master Race”
    246 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Juniez;46938020][editline]15th January 2015[/editline] the dude writes an article about how a seven year old running gag is getting old and should be retired lest people start taking them seriously and pc master race "apparently kick back hard" and digs up a private relationship between the article writer and a ubisoft blog writer (now, keep in mind: she has never touched any aspect of ubisoft's game development) and picks up pieces of tweets showing game recommendations as entire and whole judgement of his ethical character and you think this is the [I]right[/I] thing to do?[/QUOTE] As wrong/right as it is, it does open up different views about the whole article. [QUOTE=ChronoBlade;46938067]Don't mind me, just a console gamer quickly passing through this thread, seeing if I can laugh a bit at some of the posts. And my, my, been going well, so far, so good.[/QUOTE] Nice shitpost.
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;46938089]As wrong/right as it is, it does open up different views about the whole article. [/QUOTE] only if you believe that a string of ubisoft articles (pro-ubisoft articles would be an extreme stretch: "Ubisoft announces Toy Soldiers: War Chest, teddy bears to shoot death rainbows") and a relationship with a ubisoft 'employee' on the same level of gamedev participation as the receptionist influences his character enough for him to take an anti-PC stance and even then, the, er: [quote]I don't want that. "Master Race" has nothing to do with my values as a PC gamer. It's not about shunning or excluding - it's about openness and freedom. Run a game at 8K if you want, or mod Santa Claus into Skyrim and deliver everyone presents, or build a giant multi-monitor flight simulator. That's PC gaming, not xenophobic slang. We take jabs at the consoles here at PC Gamer, for sure,[/quote] ..anti-PC stance.. has little influence on the article: it's the term that he has a problem with and the fact that it both provides a target for anti-PC gamers and a possibility of people actually taking the gag seriously. Does his girlfriend's profession affect his ability to get tired of in-jokes? [editline]15th January 2015[/editline] what I'd really like to know is what part of the article tipped the pc master race to kick back hard and launch an investigation
[QUOTE=CWalkthroughs;46938089]As wrong/right as it is, it does open up different views about the whole article.[/QUOTE] What kind of views? I don't yet have a formed opinion about this relationship thing but claiming this article is related because [I]Ubisoft makes bad PC ports[/I] is a real feat of mental gymnastics.
[QUOTE=Wii60;46937607]people found out the author of the article has a love relationship with a "communication specialist" from ubisoft. [URL]http://i.imgur.com/YKVc176.png[/URL] [URL]https://t.co/JHeH9mp5YJ[/URL] [URL]https://t.co/YQ0JkJ5gXG[/URL] [URL]https://t.co/IifyHykgQG[/URL] he also has a history of posting ubisoft articles. you know how ubisoft is towards PC ports. [URL]http://i.imgur.com/4xJ69LE.jpg[/URL] [URL]https://archive.today/RzGe9[/URL] [URL]http://i.imgur.com/zdjeQWh.png[/URL] one he wrote where he said the Watch dogs PC port is better than waiting for GTA V [URL]https://archive.today/zCEQr[/URL] another where he said that the Watch dogs protag is a "lovable loser" [URL]http://i.imgur.com/Ddd7Ui7.jpg[/URL] him recommending Far cry 4: [URL]http://i.imgur.com/pyLanU7.jpg[/URL] PC Gamer right now is nuking these articles from orbit. [URL="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7W_M_fIQAAcy4o.png:large"]he changed his FB display pic from him and her as a couple to a young pic of himself[/URL], etc. Him having a love relationship with a Ubisoft employee and writing pro-ubisoft articles (without disclosure of the relationship in the articles too) is a very bad case of unethical journalism. tl;dr this article sucks and the guy who writes it sucks too. do not kick the pc master race because they apparently kick back hard.[/QUOTE] Some people truly have nothing better to do.
As hipstery as this sounds, this is one of those times when I seriously think that this wouldn't have happened if games didn't go mainstream. Fucking easy-to-offend snowflakes everywhere.
[QUOTE=Juniez;46938020][editline]15th January 2015[/editline] the dude writes an article about how a seven year old running gag is getting old and should be retired lest people start taking them seriously and pc master race "apparently kick back hard" and digs up a private relationship between the article writer and a ubisoft blog writer (now, keep in mind: she has never touched any aspect of ubisoft's game development) and picks up pieces of tweets showing game recommendations as entire and whole judgement of his ethical character [/QUOTE] I'm not judging his entire ethical character, nor do I believe there is a conspiracy or anything similiar. That would be ridiculous. I do, however, believe that you should disclose the fact that you're in a relationship with someone who works for a company known for their absolute shit pc ports when you are arguing against a joke which, out of many things, makes fun of shit pc ports.
[QUOTE=uber.;46938387]I'm not judging his entire ethical character, nor do I believe there is a conspiracy or anything similiar. That would be ridiculous. I do, however, believe that you should disclose the fact that you're in a relationship with someone who works for a company known for their absolute shit pc ports when you are arguing against a joke which, out of many things, makes fun of shit pc ports.[/QUOTE] [quote](now, keep in mind: she has never touched any aspect of ubisoft's game development)[/quote]
Which console is the jews
[QUOTE=usaokay;46930794][t]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yjpJVz-Zo00/ULChEIlNz3I/AAAAAAAAC5s/bXgPMGTSpFA/s1600/gloriouspmr13.jpg[/t] Are you telling me that this image is supposed to be taken seriously?[/QUOTE] those men has some well defined buttocks.
[QUOTE=usaokay;46930794][t]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-yjpJVz-Zo00/ULChEIlNz3I/AAAAAAAAC5s/bXgPMGTSpFA/s1600/gloriouspmr13.jpg[/t] Are you telling me that this image is supposed to be taken seriously?[/QUOTE] I only just noticed a sort-of Google Chrome logo on top of one of the computers at the front. Ha. EDIT: Well, it's not THE logo, it was just the first thing that came to mind when I saw it.
[QUOTE=uber.;46938387]I'm not judging his entire ethical character, nor do I believe there is a conspiracy or anything similiar. That would be ridiculous. I do, however, believe that you should disclose the fact that you're in a relationship with someone who works for a company known for their absolute shit pc ports when you are arguing against a joke which, out of many things, makes fun of shit pc ports.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE] (now, keep in mind: she has never touched any aspect of ubisoft's game development) [/QUOTE] So you're saying it's only a problem if she is actively participating in the development process? What about marketing then? Is that a problem? Or HR?
[QUOTE=uber.;46938427]So you're saying it's only a problem if she is actively participating in the development process? What about marketing then? Is that a problem? Or HR?[/QUOTE] I don't see why he'd have a disclosable personal investment in defending ubisoft's ports if his personally significant other has no part in them [editline]15th January 2015[/editline] not to mention that he supports the community wholesale, just not the term - unless the PC Master Race label is essential to making fun of ubisoft, there's no reason to assume that he's trying to defend ubisoft by attacking the community by attacking the joke to which they come together
[QUOTE=Juniez;46938396](now, keep in mind: she has never touched any aspect of ubisoft's game development)[/QUOTE] Do I really have to explain what "communications specialist" means and why one of them being affiliated with the press is an enormous red flag? Appearance of impropriety can be as bad as impropriety. I kinda expected PCGamer to be smart enough to own up to it and start disclosing it in future articles, unfortunately they decided to try and cover it all up, because that works on the internet and that's exactly what someone who's got nothing to hide would do. I know it can be difficult to believe but in between oppressing minorities and driving women out of the games industry some times I do like me some of them "ethics" or whatcha call em
[QUOTE=Juniez;46938459]I don't see why he'd have a disclosable personal investment in defending ubisoft's ports if his personally significant other has no part in them [editline]15th January 2015[/editline] not to mention that he supports the community wholesale, just not the term - unless the PC Master Race label is essential to making fun of ubisoft, there's no reason to assume that he's trying to defend ubisoft by attacking the community by attacking the joke to which they come together[/QUOTE] But she does, because she is working for that company, even if that is not the area of work which is directly responsible for the PC port. Because she works for that company it is directly in her interest for the company to stay afloat because her job depends on it. Regarding your edit, you said "he's trying to defend Ubisoft [...] by attacking a joke". I didn't say that. In fact I never mentioned his motivations for doing so. All I'm saying is that his article might be influenced or rather "affected" by his relationship.
[QUOTE=uber.;46938500]But she does, because she is working for that company, even if that is not the area of work which is directly responsible for the PC port. Because she works for that company it is directly in her interest for the company to stay afloat because her job depends on it. Regarding your edit, you said "he's trying to defend Ubisoft [...] by attacking a joke". I didn't say that. In fact I never mentioned his motivations for doing so. All I'm saying is that his article might be influenced or rather "affected" by his relationship.[/QUOTE] and all I'm saying is that the simpler and less contrived scenario - that he was able to get tired of a seven year old joke [I]all by himself[/I] is more likely [editline]15th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Ryo Ohki;46938470]I know it can be difficult to believe but in between oppressing minorities and driving women out of the games industry some times I do like me some of them "ethics" or whatcha call em[/QUOTE] I think it's super weird that you immediately perceived me as being against GG and ethics when all I wanted to do was keep it neutral in a topic that imo is probably not related to gamergate
i actually never made the nazi connection until i watched the boy in the striped pyjamas yesterday and i was like oh OHHH
[QUOTE=Juniez;46938564]I think it's super weird that you immediately perceived me as being against GG and ethics when all I wanted to do was keep it neutral in a topic that imo is probably not related to gamergate[/QUOTE] Remind me who mentioned gamergate first, oh yes! [QUOTE=Juniez;46938020] I think with the level of involvement you have in the GG movement you should step back, recognize your own biases, and really make sure that you're not misapplying your justices and reading into things that aren't there[/QUOTE] If it has nothing to do with GG why are you bringing it up? But by all means disregard anything I've said to focus on this
[QUOTE=Ryo Ohki;46938657]Remind me who mentioned gamergate first, oh yes! If it has nothing to do with GG why are you bringing it up? But by all means disregard anything I've said to focus on this[/QUOTE] [quote]I think with the level of involvement you have in the GG movement you should step back, recognize your own biases[/quote] yes, I did mention it to tell him that his involvement might make her biased in a topic that may be irrelevant to gamergate. Just mentioning a term doesn't mean that I've jumped right in and chose a side, man re: anything you've said - I think it's rediculous that a job she started a year ago with the responsibilities of a glorified ubisoft blogger (some of those articles were written before she started her job...) would endow her with enough personal stake in Ubisoft to influence her boyfriend in his line of work enough to constitute a breach in ethics
I DONT CARE what "side" you're on Do you not see the problem with an employee working in PUBLIC RELATIONS being personally involved with a member of the PRESS and when it gets found out the PRESS tries to get rid of all the evidence
[QUOTE=Ryo Ohki;46938716]I DONT CARE what "side" you're on Do you not see the problem with an employee working in PUBLIC RELATIONS being personally involved with a member of the PRESS and when it gets found out the PRESS tries to get rid of all the evidence[/QUOTE] I usually would in the case of a relationship with people who have direct, substantial stakes in the well-being of their games (i.e. depression quest, fez, etc), but I know enough people in the games industry to know that most of them don't care at all about their employing company other than the bare minimum required in their workplace. Maybe if she was a marketing lead or a producer of a game (or, well, anyone higher up than a blogger) it'd be more comparable to the former scenarios and worth the concern.
[QUOTE=Juniez;46938732]I usually would in the case of a relationship with people who have direct, substantial stakes in the well-being of their games (i.e. depression quest, fez, etc), but I know enough people in the games industry to know that most of them don't care at all about their employing company other than the bare minimum required in their workplace. Maybe if she was a marketing lead or a producer of a game (or, well, anyone higher up than a blogger) it'd be more comparable to the former scenarios and worth the concern.[/QUOTE] Then if it's not worth the concern you'll agree there's no problem in disclosing said relationships instead of trying to hide everything. Nobody's accusing him to be corrupt. But for as insignificant as it might be, he HAS a reason to be positively biased toward the company he's reporting about. "Well most people aren't" is not good enough. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear, we want this stuff disclosed so we can draw our own conclusions. Instead the parties involved tried to cover up everything, making it all more suspicious than it ever was in the first place.
the true mystery is why pc gamer decided to nuke everything seeing as the linked articles are just boring release / reveal information except for two, one of which: -one is a response to a heavily directed gameplay demo, I wouldn't place the fault on him here, now you have to remember that public reaction to wetch degs was very, very positive during early reveal stages, so his article isn't really unusual -and the latter of which isn't overwhelmingly positive: [quote]Aiden Pearce doesn't seem like someone who'd use the city as a playground for indiscriminate violence, but Watch Dogs tries to have it both ways. On one hand it addresses the perils of vigilantism and the surveillance state with tricky decisions and characters who I think we'll come to like a lot[B]LOL[/B], and on the other it offers a Saints Row-style death and destruction bonus mode with a spider tank. It struggles to be both at once: I felt like I was playing two games, one as Aiden, and one as a crappy Spider-Man villain.[/quote] there's not a lot of evidence showing overwhelming bias, at least with the linked articles [editline]15th January 2015[/editline] it turns out that you can see both of the opinionated articles here, they're not nuked or whatever: [url]http://www.pcgamer.com/watch-dogs-preview-hands-on/[/url] [url]http://www.pcgamer.com/watch-dogs-preview/[/url]
if you don't see what's questionable, look at it this way if I told you that i really fucking loved total recall, and then let slip that my girlfriend happened to work for the same people that made total recall, would you trust my opinion to be reflective of the quality of total recall
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939069]if you don't see what's questionable, look at it this way if I told you that i really fucking loved total recall, and then let slip that my girlfriend happened to work for the same people that made total recall, would you trust my opinion to be reflective of the quality of total recall[/QUOTE] but the article shown in the picture states that he's [I]at best[/I] cautiously optimistic [quote]I admit I'm getting a bit curmudgeonly - I mean, the highlight of my demo was visiting Aiden's sister (it just seems like something a real person would do, OK?) Even that ended with a car chase, though, so clearly Aiden's dream world doesn't let him be a real person for long. [/quote] I'm not saying "what's wrong with the bias", I'm saying that there is no reason to assume positive bias at all with the given information - his watch dogs (preview) article isn't that positive and the part where he recommends Far Cry 4, he admits that he hasn't played it and links to a review by someone else (unless, of course, he too has a ubisoft girlfriend): [url]http://www.pcgamer.com/far-cry-4-review/[/url]
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939109]but the article shown in the picture states that he's [I]at best[/I] cautiously optimistic I'm not saying "what's wrong with the bias", I'm saying that there is no reason to assume positive bias at all with the given information[/QUOTE] you didn't answer my question would you trust my opinion?
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939145]you didn't answer my question would you trust my opinion?[/QUOTE] depends on what she did [editline]15th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Juniez;46938732]I usually would in the case of a relationship with people who have direct, substantial stakes in the well-being of their games (i.e. depression quest, fez, etc), but I know enough people in the games industry to know that most of them don't care at all about their employing company other than the bare minimum required in their workplace. Maybe if she was a marketing lead or a producer of a game (or, well, anyone higher up than a blogger) it'd be more comparable to the former scenarios and worth the concern.[/QUOTE] hope this helps
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939153]depends on what she did [editline]15th January 2015[/editline] hope this helps[/QUOTE] at this point you've had to introduce the caveat of 'but she might be a person that doesn't care'. i think you can see why people might be calling foul of this, considering the recent atmosphere of distrust
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939199]at this point you've had to introduce the caveat of 'but she might be a person that doesn't care'.[/QUOTE] without confirming evidence I'd like to give people the benefit of the doubt, yes. [QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939199]ai think you can see why people might be calling foul of this, considering the recent atmosphere of distrust[/QUOTE] I can understand and I think it's unfortunate that the current situation calls for an investigation first thing, but the investigation [QUOTE=Wii60;46937607]people found out the author of the article has a love relationship with a "communication specialist" from ubisoft. [URL]http://i.imgur.com/YKVc176.png[/URL] [URL]https://t.co/JHeH9mp5YJ[/URL] [URL]https://t.co/YQ0JkJ5gXG[/URL] [URL]https://t.co/IifyHykgQG[/URL] he also has a history of posting ubisoft articles. you know how ubisoft is towards PC ports. [URL]http://i.imgur.com/4xJ69LE.jpg[/URL] [URL]https://archive.today/RzGe9[/URL] [URL]http://i.imgur.com/zdjeQWh.png[/URL] one he wrote where he said the Watch dogs PC port is better than waiting for GTA V [URL]https://archive.today/zCEQr[/URL] another where he said that the Watch dogs protag is a "lovable loser" [URL]http://i.imgur.com/Ddd7Ui7.jpg[/URL] him recommending Far cry 4: [URL]http://i.imgur.com/pyLanU7.jpg[/URL] PC Gamer right now is nuking these articles from orbit. [URL="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7W_M_fIQAAcy4o.png:large"]he changed his FB display pic from him and her as a couple to a young pic of himself[/URL], etc. Him having a love relationship with a Ubisoft employee and writing pro-ubisoft articles (without disclosure of the relationship in the articles too) is a very bad case of unethical journalism. tl;dr this article sucks and the guy who writes it sucks too. do not kick the pc master race because they apparently kick back hard.[/QUOTE] has been done and there is nothing in there that is substantial enough to cause an ethics alarm
[QUOTE=Juniez;46939219]without confirming evidence I'd like to give people the benefit of the doubt, yes. I can understand and I think it's unfortunate that the current situation calls for an investigation first thing, but the investigation has been done and there is nothing in there that is substantial enough to cause an ethics alarm[/QUOTE] but you're not giving him the benefit of the doubt if you believe that a) she works for ubisoft b) people are influenced by the company that they work for c) people are influenced by the people closest to them then you have to accept that there is a concern of trust point a is contentious because obviously I don't know the guy, but if you don't see point b and c then you're playing devil's advocate because of the subject matter if you're giving them the 'benefit of the doubt', then you're doubting one of the above points, and i don't see how anyone reasonably could (other than a if it's not true) unless you were doing it for the sake of arguments
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;46939258]but you're not giving him the benefit of the doubt if you believe that a) she works for ubisoft b) people are influenced by the company that they work for c) people are influenced by the people closest to them then you have to accept that there is a concern of trust point a is contentious because obviously I don't know the guy, but if you don't see point b and c then you're playing devil's advocate because of the subject matter if you're giving them the 'benefit of the doubt', then you're doubting one of the above points[/QUOTE] but I just said that the level of influence would depend on their personal stake in the company / games. It's pretty irresponsible to think in a binary (works on some level in a relevant company y/n)
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.