Neither do they.

Gamegate is basically the gaming press vs their own readers. The first have been pushing for this panic scare of sexist games turning the consumers into sexists pricks that hate diversity. No different from Mortalk Kombat making you violent 20 years ago, or GTA making you a killing machine 10 years ago. This began with the censorship of any discussion of a certain female developer and her involvement with a writer from Kotaku. Then the gaming press basically said gaming as a community had lost it's "pure innocence" because, thanks to a bunch of guys sending death threats, everyone else has to take the blame.

People are asking the game journos to stop the bullshit, but they won't budge, they've been living in this bubble where nobody questioned them ever. Things change, and many have realized they are just PR tools for studios, glorified blogs that want to pass as serious journalists.

u mad riskbreaker?

Yeah, i mad, how dare people demand for unbiased news and fact checking.

In my opinion, GamerGate's actual goals are to avenge themselves on a bunch of sites that published op pieces on "the death of the Gamer identity", and to use pressure to keep "political agendas" (read feminism) out of gaming journalism.

What's powering this is the extreme demonization of feminism on the internet, a phenomenon that most of the mainstream media has yet to acknowledge. People still think that the internet is not part of the real world, but I believe that crazy, extreme gender politics will be the new culture war. We can see the Right, no doubt distressed by the age of the average Tea Partier, running to exploit GamerGate. They all seem pretty desperate all around.

Gaming has been, for the most part, an apolitical thing. Gaming sites are pushing for a one dimensional pseudo feminist/diversity/social "justice" agenda. When you are callling your readers sexists dorks again and again you can't expect flowers to appear at your door.

The feminism that has plagued said sites is the kind that demonizes almost any kind of "bad" representation of the female gender. Just as there is an extreme right, there is an extreme left pushing insane ideas. They think "social issues" is a passport to say any nonesense. This is why a lot of people are calling themselves libertarians now, they have seen that both the left and right have become so extremist in their views there is no middle point anymore.

Riskbreaker, these journalists aren't elected officials, and these gamers don't pay their salaries. Most of these entitled fucks probably block the ads. They're not accountable to these people.

Furthermore, if nothing else, the "Gamer is dead" articles should have made it pretty clear that these publications no longer consider these people their audience. At this point, people who AREN'T fussy babies acting out of a sense of threatened privilege would go about creating their own media, instead of trying to bend the media that has already rejected them to their will.

Never go full retard, riskbreaker

>>Gaming has been, for the most part, an apolitical thing. Gaming sites are pushing for a one dimensional pseudo feminist/diversity/social "justice" agenda.

Because "Let Anita make her damn videos." entails an elaborate neo-marxist social justice agenda.

>>When you are callling your readers sexists dorks again and again you can't expect flowers to appear at your door.

Turns out they were wrong about that, eh?

Every single other art form (fine art, film, literature) has been able to handle an influx of consumers and producers that are not white males. Only gamers react with bomb threats and whining. Could it be because they're repulsive little children, and by their very nature stupider than the people who consume those other art forms?

But the people they said no longer exist are their audience, so, who are they writing for now? People who collect coke bottles? Because the gaming press has been in a bubble for so long, without any scrutinity from any other source, they felt they could get away with calling their userbase sexist assholes. There is a pushing militant narrative line here, they are not being subtle about it. Anyone questioning these hacks gets labeled a misogynist asshole and quickly ignored.

There is a serious demand for information and press ethics, and no matter how hard these guys try, they won't be able to dodge this bullet anymore. If video games really have any chance to become a serious form of expression it needs a serious form of media, not glorified blogs made by hipsters waiting for free gifts from developers.

Here's your depressing answer: because people whose main hobby is playing video games to the exclusion of all other activities are too stupid and insular to ever really create a "serious form of expression". Garbage in, garbage out.

Games have been around for twenty-five years. If they haven't developed a serious press by now, as you state, whose fault might that be? Oh, right, feminists.

What do you mean by a demand for information and press ethics? Other than publishing articles about gamers being misogynists, what have these sites done to provoke gamers into threatening to rape and kill specific women?

"Because "Let Anita make her damn videos." entails an elaborate neo-marxist social justice agenda."

Nobody said she can't make videos, she got legitimate questioning from many about her actual research, and she ignored all of them. If the logic here is "some people are attacking her then nobody should question her ever" then yes, there is an agenda going on here.

"Turns out they were wrong about that, eh?"

When they are making a generalization of thousands of people that read their sites, yes, they are very much wrong about it, and are acting just the same as the people that say all feminism is wrong.

"Every single other art form (fine art, film, literature) has been able to handle an influx of consumers and producers that are not white males. Only gamers react with bomb threats and whining. Could it be because they're repulsive little children, and by their very nature stupider than the people who consume those other art forms?"

Sending death threats to anyone is fucking stupid and childish, no question about that. Saying an entire community has to share the blame of a small group? That's pretty much what the gaming press said with the "gamers are death" articles.

You ARE sexist assholes. And idiots.

Why are you just now demanding "journalistic" integrity when games news has been 99% reporting and criticism (not pretending to be journalists) for over 25 years?

Or it's just bullshit cover for your death threats and sexist diatribes.

I'll give you a shorter answer:

4chan is not the entire internet, neither the entire gaming community.

This is like a Tea Party official saying the old white guy who called Obama a monkey doesn't really represent them

>>But the people they said no longer exist are their audience, so, who are they writing for now?

I assume that they're betting on the change in demographic that has the "True Gamers" so spooked, but that's their problem, not mine, yours, or Mundane Matt's.

The "sexist white male gamer" boogeyman is about as legitimate as conservatives saying every muslim is a human bomb waiting to infiltrate america to blow up themselves.

It's true, the gamergate tard-herd is only mostly white. It would be stereotyping to assume black/brown/Asian men can't be self absorbed misogynistic pricks

"I assume that they're betting on the change in demographic that has the "True Gamers" so spooked, but that's their problem, not mine, yours, or Mundane Matt's."

It certainly is a problem for them, they shot themselves in the foot with this. You hardly see the sports media claiming sports fan are "death" every time they criticize an athlete, or the sports press.

Most of this discussion has nothing to do with what gamergate is. GamerGate is: an ex boyfriend of gaming journalist Zoe Quinn and a small group of sexist shitbags trying to slut-shame her into oblivion and attempting to make it look like some grassroots campaign to improve gaming journalism when it's actually just a bunch of sociopaths who hate women wanting to hate women some more with the power of other sociopaths like 4chan and reddit backing them. That's pretty much all it is. It isn't complicated at all.

The funny thing is, 4chan is now banning any topic discussing Zoe and GamerGate.

4chan people have since moved onto "8chan" which is also a center for "ebolachan" activities too. Strange bedfellows hmm

"Nobody said she can't make videos"

I dunno, I think, "IMMA COMIN TO YOUR HOUSE TO RAPE KILL YOUR CHILDREN," is kinda akin to saying she can't make her videos.

After Briana Wu's dox and threats, I spent much of last week in Gamergate land, visiting the main venues, r/kotakuinaction, twitter and 8chan's /gg/, I can count the number of times serious points about "journalistic ethics" were mentioned on one hand. China doesn't have enough fingers and toes to count the number of times Zoe Quinn, Anita Sarkeezian and Wu were degraded and witch hunted. My favorite was a guy named Mundane Matt who made a video where he and his doofus buddy go into an hour long discussion on youtube about how Anita Sarkeezian is too white to be Armenian and must bleach her skin and she must have had plastic surgery to fix her lips because she's not ethnic enough. I was half expecting them to call her a lizard person. These are the great minds of GamerGate.

Do you guys really think Riskbreaker is busting out Enjoy or oldschool Cena levels of hateful provocation here? Can you read all the comments here and honestly say that you're being the less pejorative and toxic ones?

Gamergate is about journalistic ethics as much as Feminist Frequency is about improving the real world lives of women. They're both just excuses to get a free pass to scream and demonize others as loudly as they can. For every death threat tweet dug up, you can dig up a tweet how gamers should get a bullet to the back of the head or their penis sawed off.

If you say you're justified in shitting on Riskbreaker for his statements, then you might be on the road to understanding how people who play videogames (jesus who under 40 doesn't these days?) would get upset at Sarkeesian for her very real and open insinuation that gamers are wife beating rapists who tear out a woman's soul every time they gaze at a bikini. Saying that all she did was point out sexism in games is like a neckbeard claiming he's just following in the steps of Woodward & Bernstein.

Anyone can throw out an inflammatory statement about a group then claim victory when the inevitable backlash comes. It's now turned into a perpetual feedback loop of shouters and opportunists pointing fingers with one hand and holding out a collection plate with the other.

I'm a gamer, and I have no problem with sarkeesian.


And feel free to point out instances of death threats against the GG goons that are so bad that the FBI got involved.



You're just whiney, petulant little man-children

>>her very real and open insinuation that gamers are wife beating rapists who tear out a woman's soul every time they gaze at a bikini.

Please supply a quote to back this up, because, until you do, I have a very real fear that I may never stop laughing at you.

I play videogames. I would never refer to myself as "a gamer" as that to me is shorthand for "embarrassing basement dweller who cares about only one thing in this world". Gamergate hasn't helped at all in me moving closer to identifying myself as "a gamer", in fact, quite the opposite is true.

When I watched Sarkeesian's videos, while I didn't think they were super-great, I never felt like she was talking "about me". If you watch them and feel that way... I don't know...

Riskbreaker for a dude who is complaining about someone not doing their research you sure aren't very well-read in feminist critique of media. You can get a PhD in that, by the way, but it's not like feminist critique of media is mainstream at all. As for video games there's a ton of literature surrounding video games and it's all been around for a lot longer than Anita's videos have. Don't even get me fucking started on this.

Did you guys go on a similar hate boner spree against all Muslims when Salman Rushdie got his death threats?

Just compare yourselves to Jews in nazi Germany already.

Drama queen

I just want Riskbreaker's example of "far left feminism" to be enshrined in history permanently. That's some funny shit

"Gamers are Dead" articles. Distaste for SJW types. Far left feminism in game reviews. Easy to see why a lot of gamers are miffed.

Why are you entitled little bitches demanding all game reviews fit your political agenda?

Don't like the reviewers' style? Stop reading their reviews.

Dammit, SolRo, Bayonetta's honor is at stake here! If we let them call her sexist, next they'll go after Mai Shiranui, Princess Peach, or B. Orchid!

Can you do me a favor and cite some examples of "far left feminism"? I'm really curious what that is.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/10/14/bayonetta-2s-over-sexualiza tion-complaint-a-perfect-example-of-whats-wrong-with-modern-review s/

"When Platinum Games is on, it�s really, really on, and Bayonetta 2 is in almost any respect that counts a better game than the first, whose mechanics were already exemplary. But every time I�d feel on a roll, enjoying my time with Bayonetta 2 immensely, I�d be broken out of it by another cheap shot of T&A. I would be wrecking a flock of angelic or demonic enemies, sliding in and out of witch time almost at will, and then the special weapon I had picked up became a literal stripper pole for Bayonetta to dance on, because � well, because, I guess.

I won�t guess why the blatant over-sexualization is still there, often more intensely than before. But it causes an otherwise great game to require a much bigger mental compromise to enjoy."

Pillager, maybe you can go back to your Gamergater pals and explain something to them:

REVIEWS ARE OPINIONS. THEY AREN'T OBJECTIVE JOURNALISM. NEITHER ARE EDITORIALS OR ANY OPINION PIECES.

All the articles I see posted by the GG crowd fall squarely into that category: Editorials, analysis, things by their very nature are based on opinions. If someone is a feminist or an MRA or a furry, that's going to be where they're coming from when they give their 2 cents about a game. Deal with it.

"BUT OBJECTIVE JOURNALISM" is the reply, which seems to be "SAY THE GAME I LIKE IS GOOD!" Even if the reviewer is a corporate shill, it should be pretty obvious if you've read their other work and take that into account, just like you'd take Michael Medved being a right-wing religious zealot into account if you were reading anything he reviewed.

That brings up the occasional GG comparison of the games industry to the movie industry. For one, the movie industry went through its "hey, let's not make women nothing but sex objects and put 'em in the fridge or nothing but lingerie" phase years ago without all this drama. Also, it's FULL of corporate (studio) corruption, to the point where reviewers are often fictional, used to create blurbs for posters and trailers. How is that a paragon to hold up for praise?

Finally, it's the GG sense of victimhood that really amazes me. It's totally like the GOP during the Bush era, from claiming that Republicans were persecuted to posting photoshopped propaganda posters on forums to equating everything to war. Just today on Twitter, I see GG heavies posting about how even f they're "bloodied and broken," they'll "fight on." WTF? It's like hearing someone trying to clam benefits from the VA because they watch "Saving Private Ryan" every weekend.

And they claim they're "abusing their customers." Customers? The gaming journos aren't selling the games. That's not their job. "Person who plays games" isn't an exclusive activity that someone can be ejected from. And for all the cries of market forces, they sure seem happy to not let gaming expand into new markets or try new things, because it's not yet another bro-shooter or game with jiggle-physics.

They also toss around this word "corrupt" to the point where it's like hearing the HUAC say "communist." They want people fired, they want lives ruined, and they seem to all think GG is their own personal "I Hate You" army to hound people saying things they dislike off the net. Yet GG issues talking points memos, tells their followers what to highlight and what to downplay, and embrace some of the biggest assholes around:

https://medium.com/@poopsockholmes/the-bad-apples-of-gamergate -ba39f8fd485

Even if you think GG is about (ill-defined) corruption in gaming journalism, its tactics and many of its adherents are about as honorable as a Ferguson cop.

Hahaha oh man if you think that's an example of "far left feminism"

It sort of shocks me that there are ostensibly sentient human beings that think "hey, the game constantly implying women are meatholes wasn't cool" is an example of "far-left feminism". AND THEY ACTUALLY ARE UPSET ABOUT IT.

Who the fuck is hurt by an appeal to game developers to treat women like people? It's almost like the GamerGate people are seriously demanding the right to act like horrible human beings. Will their enjoyment be ruined by fewer strippers and objectified women in games?

The game reviews that are most useful to me are the Youtubers who open the option menu, actually show the game play, & warn of glitches, crashes/bugs. You know, the practical stuff that I care about.

IGN, Polygon, Kotaku & many others seem to employ hipsters with degrees in cultural studies. Gender activism just isn't something I wish to see my hobby.

It's not "your" hobby, so get off you high horse, you shithead.

Don't like the reviews? Don't read/watch them. I don't like shouty, 'SO AWKWARD' or fanboy reviewers, so I ignore them.

Demanding things stop existing or happening just because you personally don't like them is something a 5 year old does. (or a republican, now that I think about it)

Polygon and Gawker are their targets too. If the second dissapears nobody is going to miss them one bit.

Watching a Breitbart twit try to wring a real scandal from this (while writing "edgy" fumbling I'm-just-saying pieces about Nobel winner Malala Yousafzai) has been a highlight of Gamergate schadenfreude.

If you're going to Brietbart to learn about corruption in journalism, you're doing something wrong.

Unless you're using it as an object lesson. Maybe.

Maybe because nobody has reported the whole story? GamerGate might as well become another bogus social movement like occupy wallstreet and many others that got hijacked by celebrities trying to sell their books. Yet there is the fact that the gaming press just called that vast majority that plays video games a "sexist white male". Also, if you have actually dip into the twitter cesspool you will see plenty of people from both sides sending each other death threats and insults.

The whole story is that the gamergate jackasses have focused their "corruption and journalistic integrity" obsession on a tiny number of FEMALE game devs/critics and haven't made a peep about 25 years of games press being completely dependent on corporate ad revenue.

Because this is all about icky girls playing your games

The gaming press has always existed thanks to corporate sponsorship. Thehy have rarely, if ever, gone beyond being PR tools. The gaming media as a whole is being questioned here, not just specific individuals.

Bullshit

I've been swimming in the twitter cesspool so long I've grown a pair of gills. I reported one guy to twitter for tweeting that "all gamers should be shot". Asked a guy who was tweeting GG to inform me of threats and harassment from anti-GGs and he refused.

>>Yet there is the fact that the gaming press just called that vast majority that plays video games a "sexist white male

A FACT? I don't believe you. Prove it with links, and I'll apologize.

>>Maybe because nobody has reported the whole story?

I've been on twitter. I've been talking to these people. There's no THERE there!

I'm a gamer and I'm glad the gaming press is trying to shed parasites like you.

Write that as a wrasslin promo and i might take you seriously SolRo.

I'll put it another way; you retards single handedly managed the stop and probably reverse the increasing social acceptability of liking games after leaving college.

I'm too fucking lazy to read this entire thread so I'm just posting at the bottom so everyone can read this 8), but riskbreaker, you are an idiot. I expect more from the poetv community. Games are sexist. It is obvious if you've even glanced at any action game for more than five minutes. And the point of feminism criticizing (not attacking, but criticizing) these games is not because they believe that games turn you sexist, but because lots of people who play games are women or people who are offended by sexism. And also because it's the right thing to do, just like it would be bad if games were blatantly racist even if they don't cause racism.

And second, you're an idiot because you and every gamergate dumbass talk about game CRITICS as if they are journalists. The closest thing to game journalism is a member of a game critic website writing about death threats. These journalists are actually just critics, and a good criticism talks about a piece of work in a cultural context, how it reflects on culture, etc in addition to its production merits. Gamergate does not want this. Critiquing a game through a feminist lens is totally valid since it is an important cultural issue in general, but gamergate people are too misogynistic to recognize that women and those offended by sexism have entered into the gaming community and that it is no longer "their hobby." Ugh I can't even believe they refer to it as "their hobby." It's a fucking video game and it just implies this homoerotic boys only club.

And also, all this journalistic integrity bullshit. Zoe Quinn had a relationship with someone also in the game critic business. Who fucking cares? This complaint reeks of sexism and misogyny already because it implies a female developer could not have succeeded on her own merits but needed to take advantage of a man. Furthermore, why does gamergate consider all these gaming "journalists" to be unethical and biased but not the crazy ex-boyfriend ranting on the internet? You know why? Because believing the crazy ex-boyfriend allows them to rationalize their misogyny.

The funny thing is, most of these critics haven't even played the games they criticize with such passion. For them, a game with a sexy female character is sexism by default. Being offended is one big gray area where nobody is going to agree ever. There needs to be a debate about the content of video games, but tis is no debate, is a panic scare. Another small groupo of people trying to create a monopoly in culture, mostly to get paid for giving conferences and selling their books.

If these people are not journalists then i hope the next E3 they don't get actual, you know, journalist passes to play demos of games in closed doors and other things gaming "journalists" have access too. That's the funny thing about them, they quickly switch from journalists to "blog" when they start feeling preassure.

Kotaku admited Zoe was in a relationship with one of his writers, who wrote a positive take on her game when they met. There were legitimate reasons to question the ethical integrity of Kotaku, and the answer from many sites was total censorship to anyone daring to dig more into this.

Basically, every time somebody wants to scrutinize the gaming media, the sexist boogeyman comes into play. The trick is old by this point. None of them really care about any "social" issue, they just don't want anyone bursting their bubbles.

The game "journalism" industry may refer to themselves as journalists, but by the true meaning of the word, they are not journalists, and gamergate should not discuss them as if they were actual journalists. Actual journalism implies investigative reporting. Game "journalists" are game critics. Journalism is the community-accepted term for them which is why they get journalist passes. But it's not like they're getting journalist passes for actual journalism events, i.e. a White House press conference. Gamergate is really stupid if they don't understand this difference. Once you realize that game journalism=game criticism you can start to accept cultural critiques of a piece of art. Going to a museum and critiquing the production and messages of a painting is not painting journalism even if you write about it. The fact that gamergate wants to censor the feminist critique of video games only serves to diminish games as an art form.

So, we can't criticize them for the material they write because they are not real journalists? Even to act "just" as a critic you need to properly research whatever your discussing. If there is going to be a real debate about games and the media it needs to go both ways.

Gamergate isn't about critiquing the validity of game criticism. I am all for criticizing everything, but gamergate is focusing on feminist critiques. And you must include the context of the issue: death threats to female critics, slut shaming, referring to it as "our hobby" suggesting boys only. To deny this is part of gamergate is simply denial. Why focus on Zoe Quinn and not any other game critic that has had a relationship of whatever sort with others in the gaming industry? Sexism, misogyny. That defines gamergate. To support gamergate is to support oppression of women and women's voices.

"The funny thing is, most of these critics haven't even played the games they criticize with such passion."

And there's the No True Scotsman. Took ya long enough.

>>Kotaku admited Zoe was in a relationship with one of his writers, who wrote a positive take on her game when they met.

bullshit complete bullshit total bullshit debunked months ago fucking bullshit

http://tinyurl.com/l33e8oy

On March 31, Nathan published the only Kotaku article he's written involving Zoe Quinn. It was about Game Jam, a failed reality show that Zoe and other developers were upset about being on. At the time, Nathan and Zoe were professional acquaintances. He quoted blog posts written by Zoe and others involved in the show. Shortly after that, in early April, Nathan and Zoe began a romantic relationship. He has not written about her since. Nathan never reviewed Zoe Quinn's game Depression Quest, let alone gave it a favorable review.

I'm glad you spoke up about the bullshit "Zoe slept her way to a good review" lie, John. I was all rarin' to refute that nonsense, but you saved me the bother of having to find a supporting link.

>>There were legitimate reasons to question the ethical integrity of Kotaku, and the answer from many sites was total censorship to anyone daring to dig more into this.

You mean doxing?

He's eleven. He'll bounce back.

They also run their cause exactly like a giant trolling exercise.

Someone in the anti- crowd said something offensive? They're all like that.
A GG'er said something offensive? That doesn't represent anyone else.

Rumor about wrongdoing among the opposition? Confirmed as gospel.
Rumor about wrongdoing from GG? It's a plant, false flag, or bot.

If it supports GG, screencaps of tweets and other posts are irrefutable.
If it's anti-GG, they're obviously photoshops.

And so on and so forth.

For you, Mr. Kleenex. And then they get mad when you block them, but it's like talking to a flow chart Every response is tiresome and predictable.

But seriously, I love these poeTV clusterfuck debates. Thanks to riskbeaker for taking up the zerdzer/bill buttsex mantle; wear it with pride, my friend!

I was kinda connecting these up in the back of my head too, like it definitely feeds from the same toxic pool.

🤔 No, it's simpler than that:

https://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign- intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/

no one is gonna read your shit until you shorten it