Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[(int) magicMissile]

First off, one of the guidelines in the thread is not to link anything that mentions the OTHER unpleasant business, which the image in that specifically does.

when we see them do anything in the name of their cause (because, of course, it's so justified), it's hard to be sympathetic when they play the victim card.

The title of that image set is "Zoe Quinn is a liar".

I kind of meant the snuu snuu business.

Trying to prevent the thread from landing on the rails as the previous two did might be a lost cause, since the ZQ stuff is actually important to the topic, so excluding it is a bit like having a Ukraine Conflict thread and not being allowed to talk about Russia in any way.

Regardless, the easiest way to save the thread is to lock it whenever people are getting heated (which doesn't seem to have happened yet), and then maybe it will survive to old age and ultimately fade into obscurity.

The issue is that that stuff will RAPIDLY drive it off the rails, and I feel the thread will turn into a mess of opinions about what constitutes cheating or something else equally ridiculous. Better to avoid that and merely keep it to this for now.

[TamerVirus]

But the ZQ thing isn't the only scandal to have plagued 'gaming media integrity', right?

It's the most recent occurrence, but still.

[alexandertnt]

Any evidence of that occurring?

You can read her own blog on the subject.

You might still be able to download some the nudes of her if you really want, if the link is still there in one of the earlier 2 locked threads. Hopefully it's been removed since then though.

Other than that you can just google.

I can not link to any of these specific events because that would be a violation of both this threads rules and probably the forum rules.

[(int) magicMissile]

Any evidence of that occurring?

You can read her own blog on the subject.

You might still be able to download some the nudes of her if you really want, if the link is still there in one of the earlier 2 locked threads. Hopefully it's been removed since then though.

Other than that you can just google.

I can not link to any of these specific events because that would be a violation of both this threads rules and probably the forum rules.

I would take anything said by her about harassment with a grain of salt, as - as far as I can tell - there has been no evidence presented for it.

Also, as far as I am aware, there were no nudes in either of the last two threads. The rule is just there so we can cut it off at the head.

[alexandertnt]

Can't seem to find it, but I remember someone posting an archive of "evidence", someone else complaining it contained nudes, and someone else claiming their friend was making a new archive without that stuff in it (or something like that).

Might have missed which thread it's in or something, there have been like 4 of these by now.

[nenjin]

Friendships, money changing hands, favors, gifts etc. that's all normal and expected.  Reviews really don't count for much these days, at least I feel (with no data whatsoever) that reviews play a smaller role in consumer purchasing decisions than they used to.  The only thing the gaming media has, the only thing they need, is apparent integrity.  Jeff Gerstmann talks a lot about how he doesn't get in on Kickstarters, he avoids talking about and reviewing products by especially close developers, and he is open about these concerns.  That's the gold standard of behavior as far as I'm concerned.

What's going on with these indie devs and a certain websites is bald-faced corruption/collusion for personal gain.  I agree that it is merely an extreme case of what has already been going on for years.  But it is extreme and it is deceitful and toxic and their behavior in response has been oppressive I don't want that in the media that covers my hobby.

I believe that in the modern society the right to vote in elections counts for virtually nothing, and the right to spend our money freely counts for everything.  Informed consumer choice is the bedrock of a capitalist democracy, and deceitful manipulation of consumer choice should always be sought out and brought to the attention of consumers.  Watchdog bodies.  For games.  It's not a new idea.  4Chan is the only community that is behaving as the watchdog.

OK, my opinions are not cool, but I'm not attacking anyone specifically, just the concepts.

In the end, I don't think it's really any different than EA and whoever basically agreeing to make a review for a game positive in return, probably, for exclusive access to the next thing they do, something. Or money, at its most corrupt.

I think indie devs and journalism websites are doing exactly what semi-professionals do: they sleep with each, make agreements and deals to scratch each others backs and operate as a clique. It's called small business. I work with good ol' boy truckers, big family owned operations going back a couple generations sometimes, and it's the same shit. People collude, they play games, they game the system as much as they're comfortable with, being their own bosses and chasing the almighty buck. Some people know how far they can push it. Some go for broke and eventually get caught with their pants down.

The only real difference to me between indie and corporate doing these things is that corporate has actual laws and rules and shit to dance around. HR. Stockholders. 12 bosses. The national media. Their corruption has higher consequences across several levels of a much wider scope. Indie game devs and websites? Not so much. There'll be PR fallout and their names will acquire a cult-level status of hatred instead of the worship of "the internets." Everyone gets punished according to their potential.

It's funny. In "just plain old journalism", all this stuff has at least been on the rule books for 30 years. So I find this a pretty funny moment for games journalism, having also followed it and partaken in some of it for 20 years now. I've long thought all these goddamn websites, Kotaku, RPS, ect... needed to grow up a little. This whole thing shows why.

[Jimmy]

Are you sure about that?

It's the reason for rule 3:

3. NO DOXXING OR NUDES. JUST DON'T.

Yeah, "Doxxing" and spreading nudes is harassment.

Any evidence of that occurring?

Does it count as harassment if they're nudes of myself?

Anyway, back on topic, the concept of exchanging goods or services for favourable press isn't anything noteworthy in my opinion. I think the real take home message from this is the danger of social media giving others a quick way to trace your connections and expose links in your network of contacts. If you plan on acting in any capacity where you're expected to practice professionally or in an unbiased manner, here's a quick tip: DON'T USE SOCIAL MEDIA! Keep your social life separate from your public face.

[hermes]

In the end, I don't think it's really any different than EA and whoever basically agreeing to make a review for a game positive in return, probably, for exclusive access to the next thing they do, something. Or money, at its most corrupt.

I think indie devs and journalism websites are doing exactly what semi-professionals do: they sleep with each, make agreements and deals to scratch each others backs and operate as a clique. It's called small business. I work with good ol' boy truckers, big family owned operations going back a couple generations sometimes, and it's the same shit. People collude, they play games, they game the system as much as they're comfortable with, being their own bosses and chasing the almighty buck. Some people know how far they can push it. Some go for broke and eventually get caught with their pants down.

The only real difference to me between indie and corporate doing these things is that corporate has actual laws and rules and shit to dance around. HR. Stockholders. 12 bosses. The national media. Their corruption has higher consequences across several levels of a much wider scope. Indie game devs and websites? Not so much. There'll be PR fallout and their names will acquire a cult-level status of hatred instead of the worship of "the internets." Everyone gets punished according to their potential.

I generally agree with you, nenjin, but I have a different conclusion.  In politics, business, journalism, whatever, the value of the rules and enforcing them is not merely in curbing the excesses of behaviour, because many people break the rules and still go to extremes.  The main value is that it forces people to play the game.  Playing the political game, the legal game, the trucking game, any game, forces groups to expend energy in one particular field and this exertion is fundamental to balance and progress in society.  When people break games, when they stomp on the rules or become to powerful or whatever, you end up with tyranny.

The value of the democratic system is wholly in forcing political parties, no matter how futile it may seem, to play a game.  That keeps society healthy.  It doesn't seriously matter who is currently winning, just that they play.  Even if they play dirty, they still play.  Countries where the ruling elite doesn't have to play slide into corruption and decadence.

The clique that seems to have arisen is breaking the game, that's the problem.  By shouting down and bullying out opposition and criticism they've literally broken events and projects and are promoting their own interests at the expense of stifling other's.  I'd take old school journalists having free lunches at EA over this cancerous indie journalism any day of the week.  And I hate EA.

[wobbly]

Does it count as harassment if they're nudes of myself?

I think it counts if I have to look at them.

Anyway, back on topic, the concept of exchanging goods or services for favourable press isn't anything noteworthy in my opinion. I think the real take home message from this is the danger of social media giving others a quick way to trace your connections and expose links in your network of contacts. If you plan on acting in any capacity where you're expected to practice professionally or in an unbiased manner, here's a quick tip: DON'T USE SOCIAL MEDIA! Keep your social life separate from your public face.

Though considering I'd never heard of the game till people started making a big ho-ha about it, maybe it's exactly the way to sell your game. Honestly I think all media has little integreity. I don't think this is actually going to change unless people think a little more about the likely fact that a reviewer has a vested interest. It happens because it works basically.

[Sergarr]

Can we really call them "indies" if they're so closely affiliated with each other? Are they really independent?

[alexandertnt]

The clique that seems to have arisen is breaking the game, that's the problem.  By shouting down and bullying out opposition and criticism they've literally broken events and projects and are promoting their own interests at the expense of stifling other's.

As far as I have seen, exactly none of this has been done by Quinn or even have anything to do with journalism in the first place.

All this seems to be the reaction (or more accurately, a reaction to the reaction) to the initial event.

That does not make it a non-issue or something not worth discussing, but I think people are jumping to assumptions when they blame "them" for all this.

[hermes]

I'm not going to link anything, just check out /v/, but I was referring to the ample evidence that members of the clique were writing op.ed. pieces and reviews for their games, openly criticizing games and developers that didn't conform to their agenda, and probably some other stuff I forgot.  All of this predates the scandal breaking.  It was not a reaction, its their modus operandi, and that's the root cause of the 'blackouts and corruption'.

[(int) magicMissile]

Anita Sarkeesian made a Tweet about being harassed.
There are, however, some minor issues with it.

Can't seem to find it, but I remember someone posting an archive of "evidence", someone else complaining it contained nudes, and someone else claiming their friend was making a new archive without that stuff in it (or something like that).

Might have missed which thread it's in or something, there have been like 4 of these by now.

Again...

4. Back up anything you say WITH EVIDENCE. Please do not post "hey I heard X about Y" without sourcing it with information.

I generally agree with you, nenjin, but I have a different conclusion.  In politics, business, journalism, whatever, the value of the rules and enforcing them is not merely in curbing the excesses of behaviour, because many people break the rules and still go to extremes.  The main value is that it forces people to play the game.  Playing the political game, the legal game, the trucking game, any game, forces groups to expend energy in one particular field and this exertion is fundamental to balance and progress in society.  When people break games, when they stomp on the rules or become to powerful or whatever, you end up with tyranny.

The value of the democratic system is wholly in forcing political parties, no matter how futile it may seem, to play a game.  That keeps society healthy.  It doesn't seriously matter who is currently winning, just that they play.  Even if they play dirty, they still play.  Countries where the ruling elite doesn't have to play slide into corruption and decadence.

The clique that seems to have arisen is breaking the game, that's the problem.  By shouting down and bullying out opposition and criticism they've literally broken events and projects and are promoting their own interests at the expense of stifling other's.  I'd take old school journalists having free lunches at EA over this cancerous indie journalism any day of the week.  And I hate EA.

Pretty much exactly this.

[scriver]

Though considering I'd never heard of the game till people started making a big ho-ha about it, maybe it's exactly the way to sell your game.

Considering the game in question is a free game...

Can we really call them "indies" if they're so closely affiliated with each other? Are they really independent?

"Independent" refers to independence from big business publishers/producers, not "total independence from everyone everywhere".

I'm not going to link anything, just check out /v/, but I was referring to the ample evidence that members of the clique were writing op.ed. pieces and reviews for their games, openly criticizing games and developers that didn't conform to their agenda, and probably some other stuff I forgot.  All of this predates the scandal breaking.  It was not a reaction, its their modus operandi, and that's the root cause of the 'blackouts and corruption'.

Except this is nothing new or unique, this is how "game journalism" works. Big companies pay hundreds of thousands of dollars, maybe even millions, to control what is written about their products. Why should anyone about what a completely unimportant indie dev does in comparison to that? How is some people shilling her free game important when the whole business is built around taking bribes and selling an audience to the AAA companies?

[Graknorke]

Considering the game in question is a free game...

Because a game developer has no use for fame and a fanbase?