Ashamed to be part of the gaming community some days (like today).

[Still Life]

-Snip-

No. The point is that the behavior shown is unacceptable, and should be called out as such. This has nothing to do with those who have legitimate concerns. 'Trolls will be trolls' is the most pathetic excuse which is why your argument is off-beat and easily refuted.

I appreciate your insinuations less than your bullshit conspiracy theories of 'censorship'.

 

[ThriKreen]

But, what I want to ask is why bother with a writer spewing words and insults? If people dislike her, why not send letters to Bioware themselves asking for her to be removed if it's that bad? Then again I think that's unjustified since she did earn the job to write for Bioware, she earned the job (as I believe) so it's up to the higher ups really if she's still fit for it or not.

Yeah, it's not like she's lead and sole writer. There's a team of 4+ on each project, and a technical writer to check grammar and such, and they're always reviewing and critiquing each others' work. People act like she's solely responsible for kicking your pet dog.

1. Have you ever been to Bioware's forums? Any post containing any criticism whatsoever is deleted by the mods. Why would they behave any differently in reality?

Constructive criticism is kept, but outright bashing and flaming is not. Don't mix the two.

2. Helper got the job because her husband works at Bioware. Be honest, if you were interviewing a random woman and the only thing in her portfolio was

That's incorrect, both started at the same time so there's little nepotism there. And submissions require more than just one novel. In fact, Bioware tends to NOT hire just pure writers, as a lot of writing for their style of game is of the conversation system. Requiring good branching dialogue, not linear storytelling you usually see in other games. The usual hiring method is to submit a sample of conversations using the NWN toolset to show you know how to write dialogue that flows naturally regardless if you're a paragon or renegade type. Common pitfalls are NPCs taking AT you, not WITH you, and avoiding a lot of exposition == *yawn*.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

I'm not quite sure how to feel about skipping combat sections, because I often play games like RPGs and the such for their stories. But when I really think about it, the combat sections are also part of the story that makes every run of every game, no matter how linear or open, unique in their own respect to the individual playing the game, whether canonical or non-canonical.

But also it's the fact that actually playing it is what distinguishes a game from a movie or a television show. If you wanted purely story, you can always flick on the tv, put in a movie or pick up a book and read it. Combat systems are the very core of what makes a game...well...a game. They aren't games if you simply sit there and watch them. And there is a game mode that means you don't have to rely on pixel perfect moves. Easy Mode exists for a reason.

I'm kind of on the fence about it, really. I can't say I'm for it, but I can't say I'm entirely against it because I'm guilty of occasionally wishing I could just move on with the plot without going through more combat. I feel like from a practical viewpoint it may have some merits, like allowing people like your other half's mom to go through games with ease and thoroughly enjoy them. But fundamentally, that removes everything that makes it a game and it's nothing more than a movie, which completely obliterates what makes the gaming unique as an interactive medium.

Still working on figuring out how to say what I'm thinking without it coming across like "she shouldn't be playing games because skipping combat isn't how playing a game is supposed to be done." Because that's rude and insensitive and it's not what I mean nor what I'm trying to say. I'll get back to you at a later date. .-.

It's OK, I know what you're getting at here. And I agree - the interactivity is what makes a game be a game. Though I suppose there's titles coming out now like Dear Esther or Heavy Rain, which are more in this vein. I know my mother in law played the latter and really enjoyed it. She had some QTEs to contend with, but was OK with them. She really does love playing games, has done for a long time, but she's annoyed that because her fingers aren't as dextrous as they used to be, she can't always progress very far.

Maybe easy mode is enough, I don't know. I'm happy with combat so it's not something I use. Perhaps some kind of automatic targetting would help? Oh, I don't know. I guess my thought is that whilst Hepler's view may be seen as 'controversial', I don't think it should be automatically dismissed out of hand as 'the worst idea evar'. It's an issue for debate. Maybe it will introduce some changes. Maybe it won't.

To be perfectly honest, it wouldn't really bother me. Everyone plays games differently and has their own way of enjoying them. As long as a sort of 'movie mode', if you will, doesn't affect the harder difficulties of the game, then all's good by me. I prefer the harder difficulties because it's boring if it's too easy. Kind of like a one-sided fight. Booooooooring. It's more exciting for things to be a challenge, and more challenge makes it all the more fun. At least, to me.

It's probably because I grew up with the mindset that it's not fun or worth it if it's easy. Which often leaves me frustrated and often raging at my games because I have a bad habit of biting off more than I can chew, as I always insist on playing the hardest difficulty right from the get go with reckless abandon as tutorials fly out the window. But it feels that much better to conquer it on my own.

I can almost slightly relate with the whole 'fingers not being as dextrous as they used to be' deal. Kind of. I can't play Guitar Hero as well as I used to because I can't make my fingers move as quickly, or precisely for as long as I wanted them to, as I was previously capable. I used to be able to finish Black Widow of La Porte on Warriors of Rock or Green Grass and High Tides on Rockband and continue to go farther and take on more, but now I'm lucky if I can finish The Metal on Guitar Hero 3 without my left arm collapsing from exhaustion. It really is quite infuriating to be limited in such a manner, so I can kind of understand how she feels about it.

 

[Imbechile]

-Snip-

No. The point is that the behavior shown is unacceptable, and should be called out as such. This has nothing to do with those who have legitimate concerns. 'Trolls will be trolls' is the most pathetic excuse which is why your argument is off-beat and easily refuted.

I appreciate your insinuations less than your bullshit conspiracy theories of 'censorship'.

Yet again you don't see the big picture. Nevermind.
Have fun keeping yourself in denial. I'm ashamed to be part of the same gaming comunity as you, who doesn't see the big picture and looks at things with a black and white state of mind, as if everything can and needs to be generalised to fit that black and white norm. Cheers!

PS: As for the 'Trolls will be trolls', I DON'T SUPPORT the lynch.

 

[endtherapture]

The point of games is that they're an interactive medium, you're supposed to interact, put yourself in the role of the action movie hero or something. If you can skip combat and stuff there is hardly any interaction, and it defeats the point of a game. Watch a Let's Play if you don't want to play combat.

 

[endtherapture]

The point of games is that they're an interactive medium, you're supposed to interact, put yourself in the role of the action movie hero or something. If you can skip combat and stuff there is hardly any interaction, and it defeats the point of a game. Watch a Let's Play if you don't want to play combat.

"If you can skip combat and stuff"... Yeah, combat is all there is to gameplay. Nothing else. Because she only wanted the option to skip combat. Not "stuff".

I really had a problem with this if games would actually use combat as a tool of narrative. Nearly all of them don't. They put *story segment - combat - story segment*. They don't use the combat in any way so why don't allow people to skipt that? Why is it important that I get to fight some dudes in Dragon Age: Origins while traveling to another town. What "story" is cut in any JRPG if I skip annoying boss battles *looks at antler guy from FF X as a good example*.

Also, interaction with NPCs, exploration, establishing story through setpieces and so on are all part of interactive narrative. So why is there "hardly any interaction"?

The combat can tell the story. For example in Dragon Age Origins, having to fight people people towns shows the dangerous environment of Ferelden. When you're attacked by assassins it shows you're perceived as a threat to Loghain and he's sending men to kill you. When you're attacked by Darkspawn it reminds you there is a massive Blight going on. Imagine if you went through a Dungeon in the game just skipping combat? What's the point? If anyone can skip through the combat you're just left to wonder why the Grey Wardens are so special if anyone can get through a dungeon without enemies and talk at the end.

The point of DA:O is that it's a return to the days of Baldur's Gate in term of tactical top down combat, with RPG stuff like talking. They BOTH make the experience. If you could skip combat, you're essentially skipping most of the game cos you're also skipping leveling ups, spells, growing your character, items, weapons, potions, alchemy, crafting, which is most of the game.

Just as Dragon Age wouldn't be the same without dialogue, it also wouldn't be the same without combat because it's part of the game, you're pretty much playing a "choose your own adventure" book without it. Dragon Age is about fighting a massive Darkspawn invasion. If there was no combat, fighting the invasion is pointless. Combat tells the story just as much as dialogue.

 

[Vuljatar]

(GM shouldn't have trash talked customers)

I disagree. I think Aaryn Flynn is a hero for standing up for the writer and putting that jackass in his place. I work in customer service and I understand how important it is to respect the customer--AND make sure that they respect your co-workers. I wouldn't allow anyone, customer or not, to speak to a co-worker like that little shit did.

 

[Savagezion]

She negatively stereotyped her target market via social media. People get fired for that mindless shit every day.

There is always an exception to the rule. Self defense usually gets a "pass".

NOPE.

She acted unprofessionally by sinking to their level. No matter how serious the attacks were.

If I showed up on some country's parliament and called the president a "****" do you think it would be acceptable having him/her calling me the same thing? He would get torn by the public opinion and his political opposition.

Sorry for taking so long to reply but, are you seriously comparing twitter to a parliament of foreign affairs? How far do you need to stretch the truth in order to make your point seem valid exactly?

Now that you have acted unprofessionally on the internet, I guess you should be fired from your job too.

 

[Chiasm]

The point of DA:O is that it's a return to the days of Baldur's Gate in term of tactical top down combat, with RPG stuff like talking. They BOTH make the experience. If you could skip combat, you're essentially skipping most of the game cos you're also skipping leveling ups, spells, growing your character, items, weapons, potions, alchemy, crafting, which is most of the game.

That is the point of Baldur's Gate, to you! Does it really matter if you go through the game enjoying the story, killing enemies, and leveling up; while someone else playing the same game decides to just play the game for the story? Why can't you play the game your way and let others play the game their way? Do you get mad at people who play games on easy? or with cheats on? People who play a mage instead of a fighter?

Is it really that bad if developers but more choice into their games so everyone can enjoy it?

 

[LittleBlondeGoth]

Actually the weirdest thing I find about the whole sorry debacle is that Heplers' comment dates back to an interview from 2006. So people are getting mad (or perhaps are stil mad?) about an opinion that was floated six years ago. That's a long time to carry around so much rage...

 

[ElPatron]

Sorry for taking so long to reply but, are you seriously comparing twitter to a parliament of foreign affairs? How far do you need to stretch the truth in order to make your point seem valid exactly?

Okay, nevermind the parliament.

A president/prime minister is completely free to use the vocabulary he wants.

But if he was on public, with cameras around and someone threw a shoe at him, you wouldn't expect him to throw his shoes back and run after him using vulgar words.

Now that you have acted unprofessionally on the internet, I guess you should be fired from your job too.

You seem to be confused. This is a completely informal conversation on a forum (this post will be read by no more than a few hundred people), while Twitter is almost a "medium" on it's own.

Also, even if I was wrong (which I might be), that would not make me unprofessional. It would be unprofessional if I was supposed to be working and spent my time here on the Escapist.

It would make me unprofessional if I walked in and called names to co-workers. It wouldn't be unprofessional if I texted my family saying I would arrive late because my boss is a "****".

And now what you all have been expecting - my amazing analogy that will finally drive my point into this post:

And I did not create an account on this forum to say that I don't like games and that you are all virgin nerds who will never get a job in the videogame industry.

If I did that, I would get a forum ban.

Catch my drift? There would be no big company defending my job. Just a ban. The forum expected me to be polite even in disagreement. We expect people in the videogame industry to not insult the people they depend on, just because a large pack of video game consumers.

If you're working in ANY kind of industry, you can't have knee jerk reactions.

Actually the weirdest thing I find about the whole sorry debacle is that Heplers' comment dates back to an interview from 2006. So people are getting mad (or perhaps are stil mad?) about an opinion that was floated six years ago. That's a long time to carry around so much rage...

It's a well known Modus Operandi.

You want to bite into someone's credibility, you dig up his/her past.

Not like people change that much in 6 years. She made tweets with the maturity of a 13 year old.

"If you can skip combat and stuff"... Yeah, combat is all there is to gameplay. Nothing else. Because she only wanted the option to skip combat. Not "stuff".

(...)

Also, interaction with NPCs, exploration, establishing story through setpieces and so on are all part of interactive narrative. So why is there "hardly any interaction"?

There is a console that played games like those.

It was called a DVD player. ZING!

Seriously, if you cut off the combat in general you chop off a big chunk of the levelling up and stats. And how important items are. Which takes a toll on exploration because you won't need new weapons or armor, or that special recipe for a new potion that allows you to fight that boss.

Hey! I am not fighting to level up. That means I can just take on the main story and just defeat boss after boss - I don't need side-quests and I can skip a lot of interaction!

If you want a RPG without combat (they exist), you make one from scratch so that it can stand on it's own.

 

[Epona]

From Destructoid:

http://www.destructoid.com/bioware-writer-s-vagina-versus-the-internet-222206.phtml?s=50#comments

Jennifer Hepler is hated by people on the Internet, as Destructoid reader Ben recently informed us. That's not unusual in itself, as there are few public figures who aren't hated by a significant cross-section of the online population. However, when you consider what Hepler did -- or didn't do -- it certainly is a puzzle as to why she's despised with such pure, unfettered venom. She wrote for Dragon Age and Star Wars: The Old Republic.

Hepler is a BioWare writer and woke up one day to discover the entire Internet hated her. A number of online communities recently started dogpiling on the lady, accusing her of "ruining" BioWare games with her writing. She's also received a lot of heat for admitting that she doesn't like to play games -- certainly a requirement if your job is to craft narrative (sarcasm).

By far her greatest "crime" was suggesting that games should let the player skip combat, stating: "Games almost always include a way to "button through" dialogue without paying attention, because they understand that some players don't enjoy listening to dialogue and they don't want to stop their fun. Yet they persist in practically coming into your living room and forcing you to play through the combats even if you're a player who only enjoys the dialogue."

Whether you agree or disagree, it's not like she cut a toddler's achilles tendons with a rusty scalpel. Still, however, this is the Internet.

Everything came to a head a few days ago. Hepler decided to join Twitter, but within fourteen Tweets she has already asked support if she can delete her account. It seems that gamers caught a whiff of her Twitter presence, and everything went to shit.

Hundreds of messages have been sent to Hepler, as a simple Twitter search shows. Many choose to attack her writing and ability to craft characters. A staggering number focus on her physical appearance, choosing to call her such delightful names as "fat *****" and "obese ****." Some want to know why she's "obsessed with shoehorning homosexual relationships down gamer's throats."

Poor Hepler did not exactly help her case, publicly stating: "I just figure they're jealous that I get to have both a vagina AND a games industry job, and they can't get either." Unfortunately, that opened the doors for even more spiteful commentary, because everybody knows you can't defend yourself on the Internet -- especially if you mention that you have a vagina.

Everything seemed to come to a head with studio GM Aaryn Flynn getting involved. After one user called Hepler "the cancer that is killing BioWare," Flynn retorted by calling him a "fucking moron." So now BioWare is accused of treating customers disrespectfully, and the moron in question is going on a crusade and talking about his hurt feelings. Nevermind that he started the insulting tone of the conversation.

Because that's what gamers do, if this behavior is to be believed. Attack individuals en masse, forgetting they are people, and then acting betrayed when their victims have the nerve to bite back. It's all very well expecting "professional conduct" from a developer when a customer is angry, but when anybody's being demolished by a rampant tsunami of abuse, I don't think there's any amount of professional expectation that makes it unacceptable to lose one's cool and say something in return.

It is the height of entitlement to believe you can say whatever you want, as hurtful as you like, and expect not a word of a retort. Those gamers now acting butthurt because Flynn and Hepler responded to the abuse are as cretinous and pathetic as one can get. The fact that this surrounds BioWare -- a studio known for making more adult games -- makes it all the more sad.

Whether you like Hepler or not (I've not been a fan of most of BioWare's stories, period), this level of treatment towards a single person is never warranted, and it should make the gaming community utterly ashamed of itself. This is the kind of behavior that justifies the FOX News stereotype of the basement dwelling, antisocial nerd. This is the kind of behavior that makes the Spike VGAs look like the perfect gamer show -- because it's crass, immature, and it sports the emotional depth of a wet paper towel. That's how gamers look when something like this happens.

You know what, though? Having a vagina and an industry job is a pretty sweet two-punch. I'm pretty jealous myself.

I do not care if her response was not 'professional'. There are simply no excuses for the bullshit flung at Hepler. It's little wonder (however ill-advised) she retorted to the mob of self-entitled dipshits and trolls.

What in god's name causes people to regress into a pack of morons?

You're not very fair minded. You don't care what she said, only what everyone else said. Most fair minded people would say it's ugly on both sides but hey, who needs fair minded when your posting a rant thread.

Speaking of, are you really ashamed of the actions of others? Wow, you are stressing out over things you can't control, you'll die young if you keep that up. What's that, you're not really ashamed, that was just your hook to start a thread. Ok.

 

[endtherapture]

The point of DA:O is that it's a return to the days of Baldur's Gate in term of tactical top down combat, with RPG stuff like talking. They BOTH make the experience. If you could skip combat, you're essentially skipping most of the game cos you're also skipping leveling ups, spells, growing your character, items, weapons, potions, alchemy, crafting, which is most of the game.

That is the point of Baldur's Gate, to you! Does it really matter if you go through the game enjoying the story, killing enemies, and leveling up; while someone else playing the same game decides to just play the game for the story? Why can't you play the game your way and let others play the game their way? Do you get mad at people who play games on easy? or with cheats on? People who play a mage instead of a fighter?

Is it really that bad if developers but more choice into their games so everyone can enjoy it?

The major selling point of DA:O to me was the return to tactical combat.

Mass Effect was a cover based shooter, KoTOR was some semi-turned based thing but it wasn't the same as BG2.

Frankly, although well written, the story of DA:O was formulaic standard Bioware and had been done before in several of their releases. It was a competently designed fantasy world, but I got it for all the tactical combat stuff, and I was satisfied as it was a fun and somewhat challenging game, most fun I've had with an RPG since KoTOR and BG2 before that. I had to position my characters and stuff.

I'm all for diversifying gameplay and stuff, but removing combat is silly because it removes challenge, otherwise DA:O would've just been a simulation of different conversations and verbal duels. It's not about that, it's about balance between dialogue, exploration, character building and combat which made BG so good, and it also made DA:O great too.

When you go on BG forums you see people discussing character builds, combat situations, best weapons and stuff. I LOVED the role-playing aspects of BG but the charm was in building a completely unique character and party.

The combat can tell the story. For example in Dragon Age Origins, having to fight people people towns shows the dangerous environment of Ferelden. When you're attacked by assassins it shows you're perceived as a threat to Loghain and he's sending men to kill you. When you're attacked by Darkspawn it reminds you there is a massive Blight going on. Imagine if you went through a Dungeon in the game just skipping combat? What's the point? If anyone can skip through the combat you're just left to wonder why the Grey Wardens are so special if anyone can get through a dungeon without enemies and talk at the end.

Yes, it can tell a story. In Dragon Age: Origins it doesn't. It's just atrocious if you add those random encounters to an aready bad designed game (increasing loading times when you change areas too often).

There were a few random encounters that added to the story. Like the first encounter with the assassins. But most of them were "hey, you saw how an army of those guys destroyed your allies but hey, lets throw some idiots in your way that are as harmfull as a kitty just to remind you of them"... Why not create actual storysegments?

The Dwarf part sucked ass. Most of the combat was the same ol'. With my build (on any difficulty): run into enemies, cast all my aoe effects, next.

The Assassins section outside Orzammar for me required a lot of preparation and I got my arse kicked several times. If you feel a character is overpowered, DONT PLAY IN THAT STYLE. People talk about choices but then complain when the game is too easy, but could easily nerf it by using a different school of magic. I also found the Broodmother fights and lots of stuff in the Deep Roads very atmospheric. If you could easily skip through combat, there would be NO RISK in the apparently VERY DANGEROUS deep roads. Story and combat have to WORK TOGETHER.

The point of DA:O is that it's a return to the days of Baldur's Gate in term of tactical top down combat, with RPG stuff like talking. They BOTH make the experience. If you could skip combat, you're essentially skipping most of the game cos you're also skipping leveling ups, spells, growing your character, items, weapons, potions, alchemy, crafting, which is most of the game.

No. The point of DA:O was to tell a story. It was no return to "Baldur's Gate" from Biowares point because the last games they made (Knights of the Old Republic) was already in this way and, like DA:O streamlined to modern days which allowed breaking the combat even more.

What I really don't understand why it's such a big deal if a game lets you skip all this unneeded combat. It's not like the actual strenght of DA:O lies in the whole dialogues (wait, it does lie there)..

For me a lot of the fun of DA:O was making a character, getting new equipment, taking on new andc challenging enemies. The strength of DA:O was that it combined meaningful dialogue choices and decisions with fun and challenging combat situations. It was the most perfect blend of dialogue and combat and exploration since my all time favourite game, Baldur's Gate 2.

 

[Still Life]

You're not very fair minded.

Cite here what exactly she said that warranted over a week of constant abuse.

You're the sort person who would stand by and watch someone assaulted because they had the temerity to say 'fuck off' to a bunch of pigs.

You don't have a very fair sense of justice, but that's just a hook to bump your count, evidently.

 

[Epona]

You're not very fair minded.

Cite here what exactly she said that warranted over a week of constant abuse.

You're the sort person who would stand by and watch someone assaulted because they had the temerity to say 'fuck off' to a bunch of pigs.

You don't have a very fair sense of justice, but that's just a hook to bump your count, evidently.

I don't need to cite where she said something that warranted a week of abuse. I take issue with you not caring what she said. Just because one side is worse than the other, it doesn't make the other side completely innocent. Too bad you can't see that.

My count? I don't even know my post count, nobody on this site cares about post count, why do you?

 

[Still Life]

I don't need to cite where she said something that warranted a week of abuse.

You should, because you would find that a simple retort does not justify that sort of mob behavior. In your terms: one side is far, far less ugly than the other and it isn't the internet community.

And if you bothered to actually read the thread instead of positing your opinion, you would see that I am on record saying that Hepler would have been wiser to have said nothing at all in response, no matter how justified she would have been.

 

[Epona]

I don't need to cite where she said something that warranted a week of abuse.

You should, because you would find that a simple retort does not justify that sort of mob behavior. In your terms: one side is far, far less ugly than the other and it isn't the internet community.

And if you bothered to actually read the thread instead of positing your opinion, you would see that I am on record saying that Hepler would have been wiser to have said nothing at all in response, no matter how justified she would have been.

I read the post I quoted, nothing more was needed. I don't need to read the whole thread to respond to the first post.

 

[Savagezion]

Sorry for taking so long to reply but, are you seriously comparing twitter to a parliament of foreign affairs? How far do you need to stretch the truth in order to make your point seem valid exactly?

Okay, nevermind the parliament.

A president/prime minister is completely free to use the vocabulary he wants.

But if he was on public, with cameras around and someone threw a shoe at him, you wouldn't expect him to throw his shoes back and run after him using vulgar words.

OK, are you seriously comparing a writer to a government official? It wasn't just the parliament comparison, it was also the comparison of a writer and someone who is elected representation for a group of people. Comparing writers to public representation positions is ridiculous as many writers are known for their reclusive habits.

When people made a big deal about Paul Christoforo, it was justified because he was the head of the public relations department. There your analogy would fit. Here, it doesn't. Here, it is more comparable to a manager for a McDonald's or possibly just a cashier or somewhere in between making a statement that "misrepresents" McDonald's from a knee jerk reaction.

Now that you have acted unprofessionally on the internet, I guess you should be fired from your job too.

You seem to be confused. This is a completely informal conversation on a forum (this post will be read by no more than a few hundred people), while Twitter is almost a "medium" on it's own.

Also, even if I was wrong (which I might be), that would not make me unprofessional. It would be unprofessional if I was supposed to be working and spent my time here on the Escapist.

First, this was her personal twitter account that was besieged by ignorant "fans" that were doing nothing more than harassing her on this "medium" all its own. She could file a grievance of "cyber-bullying" against some of the posters. They broke the law, no matter how ridiculous that law may be. She just had a "potty mouth" but it wasn't illegal actions. Actually, it wasn't even a potty mouth as she even kept it "clean", it was just a knee jerk reaction to being harassed.
Second, this was not a "@Bioware:JenHepler" this was "@JenHepler" and it didn't stop at twitter, she was receiving harassing phone calls and emails. You have no way of knowing if she was on the clock or not. The worst part is this was from an interview from 2006! I mean are these haters slow on the uptake or what? This is all because of an interview that was 6 years old.

And now what you all have been expecting - my amazing analogy that will finally drive my point into this post:

And I did not create an account on this forum to say that I don't like games and that you are all virgin nerds who will never get a job in the videogame industry.

If I did that, I would get a forum ban.

Catch my drift? There would be no big company defending my job. Just a ban. The forum expected me to be polite even in disagreement. We expect people in the videogame industry to not insult the people they depend on, just because a large pack of video game consumers.

If you're working in ANY kind of industry, you can't have knee jerk reactions.

You actually just worked against your point. Everyone that was harassing her should have been banned from twitter then as your ban would for personal attacks. Personal attacks that actually break American laws.
More companies should stand in your defense when people are breaking harassment laws on you and you lose your composure in a moment of weakness that humans tend to have. I actually have gained MORE respect for Bioware in this as Bioware has acknowledged that what happened to jennifer was wrong and Bioware stands in her corner. She may have stumbled in the face of opposition, but the harassment was probably overwhelming and they don't fault her for that. It shows compassion for their team over public company image. They are willing to take the damage from the public to stand in Jennifer's corner instead of throwing her to the wolves to save face.

It honestly is amazing to me that the community is so split on this ridiculous scandal. Calling this petty on behalf of the gaming community is an understatement. It shows how far people will go to to invent something to ***** about on the internet. You dig up a 6 year old interview, rile a bunch of people about 1 subjective opinion in it, and then proceed to harass her in her every day life.
As well this subjective opinion people are getting riled about, if implemented, would be an option. Just because you CAN skip dialogue doesn't mean you HAVE TO. What bothers me most though is that people don't comprehend this this would probably branch into a new genre of game that caters more to social aspects of RPGs over the combat. Perhaps you'll play as a medieval banker or something amidst a war ravaged area. You won't be out fighting, you'll be focusing on social aspects to keep your shop open.

This is why I might agree with the OP in being ashamed to associate myself with the gamer community sometimes. This whole ordeal is childish, mean spirited, as well as plain out retarded. None of which do I fault Hepler for. Entitled little shits who can't even post intriguing arguments on their side of the debate (usually just saying "you suck") are complaining about her writing. As well, trying to tell Bioware how to manage their image/employees when they have no experience in public relations. The irony in this whole ordeal is abundant.

TL;DR/Bottom Line: There are laws in place against the harassment Hepler was treated with. Hepler made a faux pas and people want to crucify her and completely overlook the actions of the gaming community. THIS IS THE GAMING COMMUNITIES EQUIVALENT TO THE DEAD SPACE 2 COMMERCIAL, SIN TO WIN, BULLETSTORM MAKES YOU A RAPIST, AND SPIKE VGA'S. It's facepalm worthy and shameful.