Rutabaga Rising

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
I miss Susan. She gave me a good talk to after I said something stupid and got suspended for the first time. Really cheered me up.

No matter who, no matter where, there's always going to be a healthy level of bullshit.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
It's kind of a different problem between the two- much like you're likely to find a different problem between individuals and groups.

Journalists with oversight and an editor may have some standards. (And yeah, I'll throw with others who say that it seems Susan Arendt did a great job.) But if there's something wrong at an institution, it's not unlikely that it's been codified- 'x' is okay, and if you think otherwise, you will either be gradually swayed by the environment or find yourself quietly stifling your dissent. The wagons turn outward, and it's easier to drown out any sort of outside criticism.

Youtubers have standards that are more based on their audience- what draws them in and what gets them hate-mail. If there's more of the latter and less of the former, most independents tend to flame out pretty quickly. It's probably true that this encourages some click-baity behavior, but I think most people who aren't looking for something short-term shoot more for consistency- creating a comfortable "home" where people know what they're going to find.

And if a solo Youtuber makes a habit of lying or publicity stunts, there aren't any scapegoats to jettison.

I'm not trying to say conventional journalists are bad and Youtubers are good, or that one is corrupt and the other self-correcting. There are plenty of examples of very good journalists with high standards and Youtubers who are everything that people hate about the Internet. But I think they both have their own problems, parallel but not identical, and different ways of responding to those problems.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Sigmund Av Volsung said:
They are essential practices, but Journalism courses and degrees familiarise and help students internalise those principles. SuperBunnyHop is a fantastic example, and it shines through all of his work and I believe it's precisely because of said qualification.
Not necessarily the case, nor does pointing to a general job description mean you'll be held to that in the real world. I've written reviews and reported for money, and my father spent a decade or more as a reviewer.

And yes, the sense of investment that a lot of gamers have towards their games is problematic, but that brings things back to what I said initially: there's a lack of professionalism in games journalism. There's no respect for journos, and that's because they literally are just other gamers.
And if I wrote a review that mentioned GTA's sexism, do you honestly think it would be taken better?

I actually did, on a blog which has gone more in depth about my experience (Which I've gone out of my way to not link to my profile or activities), and I got a pretty nasty response from people who have issue with "social justice warriors," people who think I'm "not a real gamer" and people who were just upset that I criticised the game I hate so much I've played it for literally hundreds of hours (my play time on GTA Online can now be measured in months, actually). I have two YouTube channels which have featured GTA footage and one of them is exclusively GTA footage at this point, and this isn't enough demonstration of my cred as a "gamer." Which, for the record, I'm not, but that's another story.

For the record, I believe GTA V is my highest-reviewed game ever to be posted on said blog. It still wasn't enough. Because I gave some readers the sads by bringing up legitimate points that they just didn't like.

Thankfully, I don't have a large reader base, so I probably avoided most of the shitstorm that comes with daring to say honest things about video games.

Because I tried to talk to GamerGate about journalistic standards and practice from my (again, admittedly limited) experience with journalistic ethics, and they threatened to kill, rape, and out me.

Then there's also the fact that GTA V reviews were followed by ravenous hordes of maniacal fanboys and you get the perfect shitstorm.
Almost every high-profile game is like that. That's kind of the problem. You can't just say "it's GTA." It's any major game. Hell, I've seen it with Dynasty Warriors. Not the death threats and the mentions of sexism, but the outrage that Dynasty Warriors X only got a Y score. Relatively niche markets still have these fits. Hell, I've got crap for being "unfair" to niche games. Or being "too fair" to niche games. Or, basically, speaking about gaming.

zinho73 said:
I do not think he was bought, I do not think he was going the "easy way" (specially because he knew he was going to get flack for the Dragon Age Inquisition review), I even think he was insightful sometimes in other reviews, he was just being more a fan than a journalist, which is not what most people expect from a news site.
I honestly can't speak to that. I've never play past the first DA game, which I didn't not like. I don't know what the claims are about the game, or the validity of said claims.

If I were to return to GTA, however, I felt like Greg Tito's GTA V review told me more or less what I needed to know about the game. It informed me despite his opinions not matching mine (I didn't care if M,T, and F are terrible people or need a justification to kill things in a video game). A lot of people still took issue with his description of the game's story, characters, and what passes for "satire" (where Greg and I actually are of similar minds). A 3.5 is lower than I would have rated it (or did, since I did rate it) but it meets with the picture he paints: if these numerous things bother you, this is a deserved score. If you don't care, then it probably shouldn't bother you. Gaming reviews should assume a broad variety of players, not just people who want to explode everything in sight.

In fact, one of the good things about sites like Metacritic is that they ostensibly give you a broad range of views. I don't look at aggregate scores so much as why the people are saying what they are. Which, by the way, is why it's bullshit that so many people havce started blaming reviewers for low scores hurting a dev financially. We should be looking for honest reviews, not scores which are padded because "the developer has to eat."

Maybe he was under-critical of DA2, but I have no practical experience to answer that. The reality is I probably won't buy another Bioware game again, barring some radical shift in the company. So I can't talk to Greg's review on the subject. I do, however, know that this followed him through his entire run here.
 

Redryhno

New member
Jul 25, 2011
3,077
0
0
Darth_Payn said:
And the Loading Ready Run crew. So many great people left us all at once.
Eh, to be fair, about the only thing that had somewhat consistent quality while they were here was Unskippable(and even that was bad sometimes, only so many times you can pop the "WTF IS GOING ON" joke for two weeks with Asura's Wrath before it gets stale two minutes in).

They've stopped most sketches now and have mostly just become a podcast group that sometimes does WOTC sponsered content, has inconsistent schedules for streams, and does a poor man's Last Week Tonight once a week that varies in whether the time spent clicking on it is well-spent or not.(personally it's not worth watching if it's three of the girls, especially if Ash isn't one of them)
 

CrossGuard

New member
Mar 8, 2015
23
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Because I tried to talk to GamerGate about journalistic standards and practice from my (again, admittedly limited) experience with journalistic ethics, and they threatened to kill, rape, and out me.
Do you know for sure if these people were actually supporters of GG and not just some third-party trolls? Can you post screencaps so I can look at those threats myself? Thanks in advance.
 

Revolutionary

Pub Club Am Broken
May 30, 2009
1,833
0
0
Alternatively you could work at gawker where they don't give a shit about ethics either. I find that it's pretty easy to tell the difference between youtubers which have some kind of principles and the ones that don't. The ones that don't can be identified by unbelievably dishonest videos with disabled ratings and comments, and fail to disclose blatant conflicts of interest.
 

Lazule

New member
Oct 11, 2013
131
0
0
I think its ok. Those that research will find answers, I'm in for all manners of free speech especially and specifically on the internet. Since "internet is not serious business" and one shouldn't take it too seriously to the point of being offended by it, that has always been ridiculous.

Revolutionary said:
Alternatively you could work at gawker where they don't give a shit about ethics either. I find that it's pretty easy to tell the difference between youtubers which have some kind of principles and the ones that don't. The ones that don't can be identified by unbelievably dishonest videos with disabled ratings and comments, and fail to disclose blatant conflicts of interest.
Agreed these are the people I'm talking about... Disabling, limiting, censoring stuff isn't necessary. I mean it's your channel do whatever the hell you want with it but don't be surprised if people see you as a person of bad taste. Learning to take it easy is extremely important but well some people just like being miserable I guess.
 

harrisongrimms

New member
Jun 14, 2015
30
0
0
Glad to see at least one escapist content creator posts comments in their thread, and responds to questions and whatnot.
 

V da Mighty Taco

New member
Apr 9, 2011
890
0
0
Nothing against Susan, but am I the only one here who actually liked and respected Tito (yes, including his refusal to blanket-ban GG discussion, despite me not being pro-GG)? Didn't realize I was so alone on this. Is there something else he did to piss people off, or is it really all about that damn controversy?
 

Simonism451

New member
Oct 27, 2008
272
0
0
Thunderous Cacophony said:
Simonism451 said:
Also, that's totally not what the Joker would do.
I just grabbed the first Batman villain that came into my head for the obvious counterpoint to Susan-as-Batman; I don't know his rogue's gallery well enough to say who would be more appropriate, but hopefully the intent was clear.
Obviously, it would go something like this:
"Hey there, new guy, your review of Battlefront was pretty good already but I made some minor adjustments. Here, have a look:

Review: Star Wars Battlefront
Dear Batman,
I hope you are having a good night. I'm doing fine and I have taken the entire IGN staff as hostages and will drop them into the lion cage of the Gotham City Zoo unless you stop me.
Eternally yours,
The Joker.
Score: 9.5/10 The closest thing you will get to being in a Star Wars movie without risking a cease and desist letter from Disney."
 

Elementary - Dear Watson

RIP Eleuthera, I will miss you
Nov 9, 2010
2,980
0
0
I hope that is just a cup of Spicy 3 Pepper Sauce...

As a Brit it pains me often that McDonalds is so big here but we don't have Arbys, Five Guys or Buffalo Wild Wings... (Well, outside of single restaraunts in the biggest cities!) I sure miss that 3 pepper sauce!

Hell... We also need to continue pushing for some better Mexican food too!

(Yes... this is all I got from the comic...)
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
CrossGuard said:
Do you know for sure if these people were actually supporters of GG and not just some third-party trolls? Can you post screencaps so I can look at those threats myself? Thanks in advance.
I've dealt with enough concern trolls who have feigned interest and used information to do harm and have no reason to trust you. So the short answers are yes, no, and don't bother thanking someone after asking for evidence of harassment and threats. It's not cool to do that. If people were doing that to John Bain right now, there would be an internet hissyfit over it.

You can believe me, or write me off as one of those evil lying SJWs. It is of no concern to me.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Elementary - Dear Watson said:
I hope that is just a cup of Spicy 3 Pepper Sauce...

As a Brit it pains me often that McDonalds is so big here but we don't have Arbys, Five Guys or Buffalo Wild Wings... (Well, outside of single restaraunts in the biggest cities!) I sure miss that 3 pepper sauce!

Hell... We also need to continue pushing for some better Mexican food too!

(Yes... this is all I got from the comic...)
I don't know. Erin supports Abrys, but Jon Stewart mocks it. I'M SO CONFUSED!

Eh. I'll side with Erin. Even though she's fictional, I still believe she could hurt me.
 

Elementary - Dear Watson

RIP Eleuthera, I will miss you
Nov 9, 2010
2,980
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
Elementary - Dear Watson said:
I hope that is just a cup of Spicy 3 Pepper Sauce...

As a Brit it pains me often that McDonalds is so big here but we don't have Arbys, Five Guys or Buffalo Wild Wings... (Well, outside of single restaraunts in the biggest cities!) I sure miss that 3 pepper sauce!

Hell... We also need to continue pushing for some better Mexican food too!

(Yes... this is all I got from the comic...)
I don't know. Erin supports Abrys, but Jon Stewart mocks it. I'M SO CONFUSED!

Eh. I'll side with Erin. Even though she's fictional, I still believe she could hurt me.
Ah... Jon Stewart. I saw him once. He has that American style comedy where he says everything loudly and bluntly with the subtlety of a Gunners tourbus. - Often also forgetting to add actual jokes.

Yeah.. I would stick with Erin too!
 

CrossGuard

New member
Mar 8, 2015
23
0
0
Zachary Amaranth said:
CrossGuard said:
Do you know for sure if these people were actually supporters of GG and not just some third-party trolls? Can you post screencaps so I can look at those threats myself? Thanks in advance.
I've dealt with enough concern trolls who have feigned interest and used information to do harm and have no reason to trust you. So the short answers are yes, no, and don't bother thanking someone after asking for evidence of harassment and threats. It's not cool to do that. If people were doing that to John Bain right now, there would be an internet hissyfit over it.

You can believe me, or write me off as one of those evil lying SJWs. It is of no concern to me.
Wow, you have really jumped the gun here, especially when I've asked politely. And you preemptively accuse me of dismissing you as a SJW, when it was you who resorted to such tactics in the first place. Your lack of self-awareness amazes me.

And you know you could just out their usernames, right? So I could look into those people myself? It's not like I've asked for any of your personal information, I wouldn't be able to do anything to you even if I wanted to, you're just being disingenuous.

So yeah, you're right. I have no reason to believe anything you say, nor does anyone else for that matter.

My final thoughts:
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
CrossGuard said:
Wow, you have really jumped the gun here, especially when I've asked politely.
I have jumped no guns. Politeness is irrelevant. Look up the numerous references to sealioning around here. Not to mention, several of the referenced concern trolls were very polite when it was convenient. But politeness is not relevant, and I already explained why.

And you preemptively accuse me of dismissing you as a SJW, when it was you who resorted to such tactics in the first place.
Except, you know, for the part where I didn't accuse you. I said "you can do X" for all I care. This is not an accusation.

Your lack of self-awareness amazes me.
That you made up claims against me the minute I was not willing to help you and then accused me of lacking self-awareness based on those charges does not amaze me. This is exactly why I am discinlined to trust or be of help to people who randomly pop up and start down this path.

And you know you could just out their usernames, right? So I could look into those people myself? It's not like I've asked for any of your personal information, I wouldn't be able to do anything to you even if I wanted to, you're just being disingenuous
You went from "screenshot the evidence," to "out their usernames." these are not only two different things, but the former requires me to either include evidence that sets me up to be further jeopardised or leave out the actual threats themselves. If I were to give you names, there would be nothing to go on, so I can't imagine that would be particularly helpful to your investigation. Pardon me if I don't find some irony in you saying I'm the one being disingenuous. You entirely shifted your standard of evidence and blamed me for not being forthcoming.

Also, you can claim that you are in no position to do anything, but that's not entirely true. People have used information from this board to threaten me. I won't tell you what information, because the last thing I want to do is give yet another person ammunition, but the door swings both ways and I have zero reason to believe you, either.

Did I leave anything out there?

So yeah, you're right. I have no reason to believe anything you say, nor does anyone else for that matter.
And here's a dirty little secret: I don't care. No offense, but you weren't one of the people addressed by that post, nor were you part of the audience I think will benefit from it. I didn't write this as a scalding expose of GamerGate in an attempt to tear them down. I wrote a lengthy post (at least, for me, some people can write almost literal novels) to illustrate some of the issues with reviews from the perspective of someone who has been both a reporter and a reviewer. You're free to also not believe that, though it's still true. Hell, you're free not to believe that I write on a blog, or any of the other things I've said. None of that matters.

What I wrote was specific to people who were trying to actually address the idea of criticism in the games industry, and why I think what they had to say wouldn't necessarily work. More so one than the other. You, random user I am in no position to recognise, let alone trust decided to ask for evidence so you could investigate, though why I would think that was meaningful is beyond me. I'm gessing the thoughts that specifics might generate legitiamate security concerns for me never even occurred to you.

I mean, if you can't trust a random user with ten whole posts and no profile with such information, who can you trust?

My final thoughts:
Yeah, I'm not watching that video. In the future, if you actually wish to communicate with me, I suggest doing so directly. But I don't particularly expect that to be an issue. It looks like you're just here to provide cover fire in a fight that's not happening. I won't indulge that further.
 

Naldan

You Are Interested. Certainly.
Feb 25, 2015
488
0
0
If people have impact on the sales on a greater scale, then they should be held responsible for the work.

No matter if it's a YouTuber, a blogger, a journalist. If they write and state opinions, it's their right. If they make reviews that end up on Metacritic, then it's noteworthy.

What is there to discuss? That reviews are opinions? Having a good port on PC is objective. There could be adjustments on when the 'good' starts and the bad ends, but in general, there is few to disagree on, as far as I'm concerned.

Bunnyhop says that his degree isn't helping much in his work. I would agree, but he comes across as too level-headed as to be not objective. And journalism in its origins had to strive for objectivity. That's why the mere concept of having journalists even review anything is very strange to me. For example, Yahtzee has far more qualifications that make him a reasonable reviewer.

Ex-devs, people with a certain reputation, whatever. Why is it that normally reviewers of games are journalists? Why does one need to have an editor to state an opinion, when afaik most of the time, it's for PR reasons?
 

CrossGuard

New member
Mar 8, 2015
23
0
0
Except, you know, for the part where I didn't accuse you. I said "you can do X" for all I care. This is not an accusation.
I'm not the one who started rambling about SJWs or John Bain. I think you made it clear you want to put me on a different side of an issue when there was no need for that.

requires me to either include evidence that sets me up to be further jeopardised or leave out the actual threats themselves
How so? You can easily screencap their comments (like Anita Sarkeesian does with her harassers), and edit out any personal information those comments might contain (MS Paint does the job). I'm sure you're smart enough to realize that, which is why I think you're being disingenuous.

If I were to give you names, there would be nothing to go on
I decide that once I know who those people are. If X and Y users on twitter or tumblr harassed you, I can find out their post history to see where they really stand. Unless they were completely anonymous, in which case you have no idea whether they were GG supporters or not (hence me asking if they could be some third party trolls).

the door swings both ways and I have zero reason to believe you, either
The burden of proof is still on you. It doesn't matter whether you me trust me or not, your original claim still needs to be proven.

And here's a dirty little secret: I don't care. No offense, but you weren't one of the people addressed by that post, nor were you part of the audience I think will benefit from it. I didn't write this as a scalding expose of GamerGate in an attempt to tear them down. I wrote a lengthy post (at least, for me, some people can write almost literal novels) to illustrate some of the issues with reviews from the perspective of someone who has been both a reporter and a reviewer. You're free to also not believe that, though it's still true. Hell, you're free not to believe that I write on a blog, or any of the other things I've said. None of that matters.
It doesn't matter who you replied to. And if you must know, who you are and what you do is completely irrelevant to me, you're just some person with a high post count on some internet forum as far as I'm concerned, and why you're so afraid some internet troll will come after you to destroy your life when there's arguably much bigger targets out there, I don't understand, nor do I care all that much. What matters to me is that you hold potentially useful data that can improve the platform on which tens of thousands of people use to discuss issues in gaming (despite how ham-fisted that claim felt on your original post, but that's besides the point).

I mean, if you can't trust a random user with ten whole posts and no profile with such information, who can you trust?
Yeah well, I don't care about my e-peen.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,768
0
0
That blurb just made me miss the Susan Era of the Escapist so damn much.