Zachary Amaranth said:
Bruce said:
In fact my overall opinion on GG is that not only is it not about ethics, it is actually opposed to ethics.
This really does seem to be the case, at least judging by the actual actions of the movement.
It's about ethics in games journalism. Gamergate (the majority) are not up for discussing ethics as we realise that gamers be a fairly diverse bunch and that comes with a diverse set of people.
Gamergate (the majority) are about asking the journalists to:
1) Admit when they are complicite in a game's development or have personal relations with a dev or publisher
2) To avoid or not have said relations or complications; it goes against EVERY established ethical code of journalism
3) For journalists to not censor conversation to protect one of their own, but to discuss it freely
4) For journalists to not try and direct or misdirect the narrative of an event but to report on what actually happened with the evidence available, not because "we give the benefit of the doubt to our friends" (*cough, Mr. Tito, cough)
In the Escapist's defence, they have updated their Code of Ethics, they have allowed conversation and Archon has been fantastic about the whole thing.
Gamergate are mostly not asking for the consumer to be protected, but rather for the developer to be protected from pertinent criticism.
Well, not exactly. Gamergate seems to be asking for the consumer to be protected--namely them. They[footnote]And while I realise a disclaimer will probably do nothing to stop people getting offended anyway, when I say "they" I refer to the movement as a whole, not each person involved[/footnote] don't want to hear about women in games or feminists or SJWs or anything they deem "political." And, of course, "political" usually means "politics I don't personally like."
Nope, Gamergate is about asking the Games Journalists to not censor and not misdirect a narrative.
E.g. Gamergate wants ethics to be addressed. The media keeps pushing harrassment despite constant decrying.
E.g. 2 Electric Boogaloo: Gamergate doxes. Media decries. SJWs dox. Nothing. Zip. Zilch. Unfair reporting.
E.g. 3 The Return of the Quinn: Several prominent journalists and devs attack, encourage and bait followers to "be a good feminist" and attack people, dox them, get them fired. Not only are they not fired for such unprofessional behaviour, but they are given more money sometimes.
E.g. 4 Live GG or Die Hard: Games Media begins to heavily push towards an agenda driven narrative which is openly admitted by several prominent journalists.
Politics are fine; giving a good game 1/10 because you don't like how it portrays something despite being a good game as this is a narrative you're pushing is bad.
Jimquisition good.
Leigh Alexander bad.
KisaiTenshi said:
The 4chan GG stuff started disappearing because they couldn't get those doing illegal things to stop, so they just shut all of GG stuff down. Same thing happened with Anita Sarkeesian threads from the TvW video Kickstarter. 4chan is the absolute last place you ever want to visit when going factfinding except maybe ED or The Onion which post total garbage made up for kids and adults with poor reading comprehension.
Has this been documented? I mean, I never bought the censorship claims in the first place (people were claiming censorship even on the Escapist as others were praising them for being the one place keeping discussion open), but I'm still seeing the claim of censorship and it'd be nice to know if it's utter crap.
Well, at the VERY beginning, there was some censorship by the Escapist.
Then there was radio silence on many events that, in the past, the Escapist had been only too happy to report on, but now would say nothing.
There was also a lot of proof later revealed that Greg and Archon had a lot of pressure from the other media figures to COMPLETELY censor discussion; again, I thank both Greg and Archon for having some intergrity.
But go to, let's say 4chan and mention Gamergate; see how long you last before you get hit with a ban.
OpticalJunction said:
i'm on the dev's side. the game itself doesn't look that bad and jim is not doing the gaming industry any favors by ridiculing indie game devs who are doing this more out of love and passion, than money. game devs do have a right to defend their own games. jim was being extremely disrespectful.
What is the dev doing for the industry by calling Sterling a worthless pile of shit in a so-called "review" of the "Reviewer?"
And yes, this really does look that bad.
Yeah, Jim was being pretty kind to the game from what I could see; the game developer was pretty harsh straight back and I can tell you that if he had simply held his hand up and said "Ah, Jim, I see what you've said, how about I patch these things and could you please give it a proper review next time?", Jim may well have been kinder.
But doing what he did, well, now everyone knows him for being a complete dick and Jim comes out of this no worse, really.
Hell, he even game Jim the nickname: Jim Fucking Sterling Son. Jim won.
Anti Nudist Cupcake said:
What was there to understand? The game has a UI. It shows how much ammo, health, etc you have. That is pretty self-explanatory. He'd just be reading what is already on the screen. Besides, the ammo-counter wasn't the problem, it was actually getting it replenished that was his problem.
It's ethics in journalism, son.
Well, there was the ammo counter, there was the fact it was a complete mess, and there was the fact he was charging money for what was an utterly subpar game. Remember; you can get full, well made games for the same price.
If Jim was talking to the dev of the Killing Floor who asked Jim "Hey, Jim, think you could screw up my competitor?" and then Jim did it, then it's about ethics.
No, what Jim did was a mercy killing.
