Gaming Journalism Is Over

Tak Ne said:
I disagree. When I used to read printed PC magazines 10-15 years ago they had real reviews and articles.

I think what changed things is the internet. In those days by the time they were published game reviews were at least a month old and hard copy sales were a significant portion of the magazine's revenue. Game patches were mostly distributed on cover disks so any bugs & issues were there for a while at least. Most importantly, negative reviews & complaints were isolated so even bad games had a fair window to sell in.

These days people want patches instantly and negative reviews & complaints show up on searches. To counter this the games companies have done their best to control & manipulate information to ensure a window where a game will sell (however bad it is). On top of flooding every possible avenue with advertising they bribe, coerce and do whatever they can to ensure any negative information is lost in the noise. Most online journalists are just easy to manipulate because they rely on the games companies for early access & advertising.
Click to expand...

Have to agree with this. All those magazines I used to read in the mid to late 90s are all gone, and it's online. Articles are maybe a couple of paragraphs and 30% screenshots now. Way more in line with bloggers.
 
8du8 said:
And they are just doing this to random people for no reason, they are not retaliating in anyway to anything that may have been said/done?

I don't disbelieve that people are randomly assholes, but please show me an example of someone being harassed in IRL completely randomly. That part I find hard to believe. Not in anyway condoning it, but if I went and poked a hornets nest should I not expect to get stung?
Click to expand...

Creepy fan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhYzlIfN39s

Cool fans who just randomly popped in to say Hi!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZYvyEFPYUs

He also sent out emails because someone else besides the ones mentioned above were posting his personal information maliciously and threatened to kill him. This person followed him around town and posted pictures of it in Chance's stream.

Kaceytron a female streamer had her entire county's internet DDOS'd because they couldn't get her IP address.
http://siliconangle.com/blog/2014/0...sites-and-twitch-streamers-for-new-years-day/

PhantomL0rd gets swatted and "fans" send pizza to his house.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwmhOuF31w4

Last week or so the guys that got swatted on stream.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju6KZHLVOO8

Do I need to post more occurrences of harassment?
 
gamepro.jpg


next-gen-premier-95-490.jpg


magazine-electronic-gaming-monthly-super-street-fighter-ii-v6-10-of-12-1993_10-page-1--article_image.jpg


gf-mario-cart-1.jpg


Remember when video games were awesome?
 
I can't tell if it's just from getting older (I'm 26 now), but it seems like the quality of tech and game related journalism has declined significantly over the last 10 years. It all feels like advertising rather than professionally written perspectives from real users.
Click to expand...

I saw this and felt compelled to comment on something it reminded me of.

Every single time I browse the case modding forum it reminds me why I don't participate anymore even though do some pretty legit stuff... because the only people that get any recognition it seems are the ones that sink hundreds upon hundreds of dollars into things that your average person simply doesn't want to waste money on: custom water cooling fittings and hoses, custom machine work, custom powder coating, custom lazer etching/cutting... etc.

I feel like the days of people like Bonzanego (spelling?) are long gone. Someone has a genuine skill and they work within their limited budget building and designing something amazing. Anyone remember his fan grills? https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=bonzai-mods&FORM=HDRSC2
 
FrEaKy said:
Between this article and the one the same writer posted earlier about Zoe Quinn, these show without a shadow of a doubt, that the best form of review for a game your going to get, is a youtube playthrough or a twitch stream.

Sorry, gamer JOURNALISM is a dying art, because no one practices ART anymore, they throw tracing paper on the last article and do it again. And some youtubers who offer reviews (except for a handful few) are paid off.
Click to expand...

Most reviews, reviewers about anything on the internet are paid off.
 
I think gaming journalism died in the 90's when the last of the independent gaming magazines were purchased by the large publishing houses ... a lot of people here are probably too young to remember Computer Gaming World before it was purchased with columnists like Scorpia who were actually game players but it was a great magazine back in its day ... we have nothing like it now

That said, a lot of gamers have lost the ability to enjoy "playing" their games ... when I started computer gaming in 1980 I loved the wonder of having that power at my fingertips ... even some of the buggy games were still a joy to play because everything was so new and shiny ... however, the advent of multiplayer and competitive gaming has killed a lot of that joy and wonder ... now it is all about being better than other people and not always about playing really good games
 
CreepyUncleGoogle said:
Feminism and being a slut aren't always, but very frequently not things that go together in the same person. I think you're being irrational and looking for someone to blame about how something that used to be a private niche occupied by like-minded people is now a mainstream recreational activity wherein many who partake have very different attitudes. It's change, which is usually scary when your expectations have been conditioned, and I think that you can overcome your fear if you calm down a little and act rational about your hobby rather than assigning a socio-political self-victimizing agenda to it that makes it a lot more serious and dread-filled than it is in reality.
Click to expand...

hahaha that's awesome thanks for the laugh.
 
Gaming journalism has been over for me a long time ago. I'm talking more than 5+ years now. They stopped writing sensible articles, in my opinion. What we have now in gaming journalism is a soap opera. It's more about the author than the games or the industry.
 
cageymaru said:
Creepy fan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhYzlIfN39s

Cool fans who just randomly popped in to say Hi!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZYvyEFPYUs

He also sent out emails because someone else besides the ones mentioned above were posting his personal information maliciously and threatened to kill him. This person followed him around town and posted pictures of it in Chance's stream.

Kaceytron a female streamer had her entire county's internet DDOS'd because they couldn't get her IP address.
http://siliconangle.com/blog/2014/0...sites-and-twitch-streamers-for-new-years-day/

PhantomL0rd gets swatted and "fans" send pizza to his house.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwmhOuF31w4

Last week or so the guys that got swatted on stream.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju6KZHLVOO8

Do I need to post more occurrences of harassment?
Click to expand...

None of this seems completely random to me. Its quite apparent that the people doing this are receiving plenty of attention as well. So I hardly see any point in giving them more attention, which leads me back to my original point about ignoring it. Every example you've shown, the ones doing the harassing were given the attention they desired by having videos and articles posted about them. So where is evidence of your point that ignoring them doesn't work?
 
cageymaru said:
Creepy fan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhYzlIfN39s

Cool fans who just randomly popped in to say Hi!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZYvyEFPYUs

He also sent out emails because someone else besides the ones mentioned above were posting his personal information maliciously and threatened to kill him. This person followed him around town and posted pictures of it in Chance's stream.

Kaceytron a female streamer had her entire county's internet DDOS'd because they couldn't get her IP address.
http://siliconangle.com/blog/2014/0...sites-and-twitch-streamers-for-new-years-day/

PhantomL0rd gets swatted and "fans" send pizza to his house.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwmhOuF31w4

Last week or so the guys that got swatted on stream.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju6KZHLVOO8

Do I need to post more occurrences of harassment?
Click to expand...

Meanwhile 99.99999% of the Internet is not harassing anyone.
There is no problem and there are a small % of freaks everywhere.
 
Most Journalism is just advertisement. Nobody can criticize a game without losing ad revenue. Everything is awesome.
 
But it's true - gaming is one of the only industries I can think of that literally shits on their own customer base. Especially true of the last generation and continuing to the present day.

Let's see: Unfinished/broken games, forced DLC (hey just wait 6 months to buy it again with the Game of the Year version!), broken promises (gameplay features, graphics, etc etc), DRM, bought/paid reviews, 10/10 everywhere for terrible games, microtransactions/skins, I'm sure people can come up with other reasons.

The "Gamers" are still alive and kicking, but it took a seemingly out of place story to get the snowball rolling to expose just how much gaming has changed - and not for the better, but for the worst. But I'm really not sure if it's fixable at this point. What rakes in cash will always be a company's first priority - and we've seen how much rehashed sequels can rake in (ie Madden, CoD, etc) which I'm ok with since some of these entries can be decent. You can compare it to the film industry with Fast and Furious (what are they up to, 7 now?), Comic Book movies, etc etc. But the film industry doesn't PUSH 3D - it's simply an option. A full video game? Now that's a rare find.
 
Technikal said:
Meanwhile 99.99999% of the Internet is not harassing anyone.
There is no problem and there are a small % of freaks everywhere.
Click to expand...

So if someone swats your house it's fine because there was only a 0.000001% chance that you'd make a wrong move answering the door and get gunned down. I understand now. Thank you!
 
kidstechno said:
But it's true - gaming is one of the only industries I can think of that literally shits on their own customer base. Especially true of the last generation and continuing to the present day.

Let's see: Unfinished/broken games, forced DLC (hey just wait 6 months to buy it again with the Game of the Year version!), broken promises (gameplay features, graphics, etc etc), DRM, bought/paid reviews, 10/10 everywhere for terrible games, microtransactions/skins, I'm sure people can come up with other reasons.
Click to expand...

There are tons of amazing games from relatively moral companies that have zero of these problems. And there are tons of "gamers" who ignore these actually good games in favor of EA/Ubisoft's latest shovelware.
 
Zoe Quinn is not a video game designer (making a point and click webpage is not the same as making an actual video game). Anita Sarkeesian is not a video gamer. Gaming has been infiltrated by a bunch of hipsters who THINK they are gamer designers but they are not.

This is just another example of the left's intolerance for any views that dissent from their own. You will be made to think exactly like them or else they will hound you, slander you, and stir up shit to make you pay for your thought crimes.

Misogyny is defined as the resentment or hatred of women. Misogyny is not making sexual comments, it is not making video game characters with cleavage and it is not hitting on someone. Those may or may not be inappropriate behaviors but they are not misogyny. On the other hand, there is plenty of misandry coming from the feminazis and PC thought police. It is plainly clear that a number of them resent men.

As for the game journalists, fuck them. I read gaming websites/magazines to read about games, not the latest PC thought police bullshit about how evil and misogynist gamers are or the latest indie hipster crap.

I stopped reading Rock Paper Gloria Steinem precisely because John Walker is a fucking idiot and I got tired of hearing about how evil men are. Kotaku actually threw up a shitstorm because a game designed to teach women how to masturbate had the audacity to assume all women have vaginae (I expect nothing less from anything related to slimey Gawker).
 
kidstechno said:
But it's true - gaming is one of the only industries I can think of that literally shits on their own customer base. Especially true of the last generation and continuing to the present day.

Let's see: Unfinished/broken games, forced DLC (hey just wait 6 months to buy it again with the Game of the Year version!), broken promises (gameplay features, graphics, etc etc), DRM, bought/paid reviews, 10/10 everywhere for terrible games, microtransactions/skins, I'm sure people can come up with other reasons.

The "Gamers" are still alive and kicking, but it took a seemingly out of place story to get the snowball rolling to expose just how much gaming has changed - and not for the better, but for the worst. But I'm really not sure if it's fixable at this point. What rakes in cash will always be a company's first priority - and we've seen how much rehashed sequels can rake in (ie Madden, CoD, etc) which I'm ok with since some of these entries can be decent. You can compare it to the film industry with Fast and Furious (what are they up to, 7 now?), Comic Book movies, etc etc. But the film industry doesn't PUSH 3D - it's simply an option. A full video game? Now that's a rare find.
Click to expand...

And developers complain because people like me wait for Steam sales with ALL the DLC and ALL the patches so the game works before I buy it (unless its an Elder Scrolls game).
Go figure right?
Why would anybody in their right mind wind up spending $100+ for broken ass games they're not going to be able to enjoy for at least a year after its been released if they just wait the year and get it for $20?
 
damicatz said:
Misogyny is defined as the resentment or hatred of women. Misogyny is not making sexual comments, it is not making video game characters with cleavage and it is not hitting on someone. Those may or may not be inappropriate behaviors but they are not misogyny. On the other hand, there is plenty of misandry coming from the feminazis and PC thought police. It is plainly clear that a number of them resent men..
Click to expand...

Misogyny includes disrespecting a woman for having sex, paid or not, because you think she's impure. Whether she bought a reviewer or not is a valid point of discussion, but for most of the men who have commented on the situation on sites like this to devolve the discussion into what she looks like is misogyny. Doesn't matter if she had sex with someone - she's still a person and that is not invalidated here. I'm not sure if you think misogyny is only violence, but it is also disrespecting women for something you wouldn't disrespect a man for. Any discussion about her looks is uncalled for and disrespectful. Discuss the quality of her game and whether she bought reviews (in general) only. Also don't disrespect her any more than the company you probably buy games from (EA or whatever) because she is still above them no matter what she's done.

I am not a feminist, for the record. I am a humanist (disregard the stupid religious aspect of that term; it's fallen out of use and this use of the word is more logical).
 
Who wants to read some 'journalist' preaching from a hipster SJW pedestal about some vague tangent related to video game 'culture' when I can just watch a Youtube video or Twitch stream of someone who is not a condescending asshole ( or is if you like that ) about ACTUAL video games?
 
8du8 said:
None of this seems completely random to me. Its quite apparent that the people doing this are receiving plenty of attention as well. So I hardly see any point in giving them more attention, which leads me back to my original point about ignoring it. Every example you've shown, the ones doing the harassing were given the attention they desired by having videos and articles posted about them. So where is evidence of your point that ignoring them doesn't work?
Click to expand...

So swatting someone and having the police show up at their home is fine because the person doing it was seeking attention. We as a society should stick our heads in the sand and pretend that it never happened. This is because that there is only a small percentage of harassing jerks on the internet that would actually do it. Also the victim should have buried their head deeper in the sand and they maybe it wouldn't have happened. Completely the victim's fault in these few cases.

Charles Manson should have been ignored. If the actress Sharon Tate and the rest of the people that his group murdered had done a better job of walking away while whistling a tune then she would be alive today. It was Ms Tate's responsibility to ignore crazy random people that show up at her house unannounced. She shouldn't have been so famous.

Justin Verlander. Kate Upton, etc shouldn't have taken pictures of themselves using their own phones. It is their fault that someone hacked Apple iCloud and posted their photos all over the internet. It was because of their celebrity that they are to blame for this happening. If they had ignored the hackers then this wouldn't have happened. Nobody would have known about it.
 
DeathFromBelow said:
I can't tell if it's just from getting older (I'm 26 now), but it seems like the quality of tech and game related journalism has declined significantly over the last 10 years. It all feels like advertising rather than professionally written perspectives from real users.
Click to expand...

Same perspective. Same age. Maybe we are getting old, haha.

Bravo to this article, though.
 
dandragonrage said:
Misogyny includes disrespecting a woman for having sex, paid or not, because you think she's impure. Whether she bought a reviewer or not is a valid point of discussion, but for most of the men who have commented on the situation on sites like this to devolve the discussion into what she looks like is misogyny. Doesn't matter if she had sex with someone - she's still a person and that is not invalidated here. I'm not sure if you think misogyny is only violence, but it is also disrespecting women for something you wouldn't disrespect a man for. Any discussion about her looks is uncalled for and disrespectful. Discuss the quality of her game and whether she bought reviews (in general) only. Also don't disrespect her any more than the company you probably buy games from (EA or whatever) because she is still above them no matter what she's done.

I am not a feminist, for the record. I am a humanist (disregard the stupid religious aspect of that term; it's fallen out of use and this use of the word is more logical).
Click to expand...

To clarify, what you are describing is not misogyny; it's sexism. Criticizing a woman for doing something you would not criticize a man for is not misogyny. Misogyny is a hatred of women, not feeling a general disrespect for them.

Is such a distinction important? I think so. Because sexism is a problem all its own, and I think it probably is the problem that a lot of the SJWs in gaming journalism actually are intending to tackle. But labeling all sexism as misogyny in an effort to raise the urgency of addressing the problem is lazy, ineffective, and undermines the credibility of the entire movement.
 
dandragonrage said:
Misogyny includes disrespecting a woman for having sex, paid or not, because you think she's impure. Whether she bought a reviewer or not is a valid point of discussion, but for most of the men who have commented on the situation on sites like this to devolve the discussion into what she looks like is misogyny. Doesn't matter if she had sex with someone - she's still a person and that is not invalidated here. I'm not sure if you think misogyny is only violence, but it is also disrespecting women for something you wouldn't disrespect a man for. Any discussion about her looks is uncalled for and disrespectful. Discuss the quality of her game and whether she bought reviews (in general) only. Also don't disrespect her any more than the company you probably buy games from (EA or whatever) because she is still above them no matter what she's done.

I am not a feminist, for the record. I am a humanist (disregard the stupid religious aspect of that term; it's fallen out of use and this use of the word is more logical).
Click to expand...
His comment was stemming more from how people like Sarkeesian point out that games are misogynistic for how women are protrayed in video games, and he rightly points out that for the most part it is wrongly defined as misogyny. I pointed out in the other thread that if the majority of game designers are male, then the fantasies they create are going to be from a male perspective. Adoration and admiration of the female form is not misogynistic. We should not hang all men for being men by nature.

I don't, however, want your point to get lost in that. Yes, there are comments and threats being thrown at these SJWs that are, in fact, misogynistic. But simply pointing out someone is a woman and could therefore have gender bias does not mean you have hate and disrespect toward women. Just as men have fantasies and thoughts of women, women can have the same fantasies and thoughts about men. The thing people hate is when they get grouped with "them" whenever valid criticisms are brought forward simply because they offer a countering opinion when the target of the criticism happens to be of the opposite gender.
 
4chan... let's just say that /v/ was never good.

Going back to the article. Game journalism has become somewhat dull in a sense. We all know that reviews are best sourced from player comments and feedbacks, so they are really there to serve as a processed source of advertisement (since I am too lazy to seek out all the new releases by individual studios, one game at a time.)
 
drlawyer said:
To clarify, what you are describing is not misogyny; it's sexism. Criticizing a woman for doing something you would not criticize a man for is not misogyny. Misogyny is a hatred of women, not feeling a general disrespect for them.

Is such a distinction important? I think so. Because sexism is a problem all its own, and I think it probably is the problem that a lot of the SJWs in gaming journalism actually are intending to tackle. But labeling all sexism as misogyny in an effort to raise the urgency of addressing the problem is lazy, ineffective, and undermines the credibility of the entire movement.
Click to expand...

To be sexist to the point where you would throw a woman out to the wolves because she's had sex qualifies plenty as misogyny to me, and I don't think the distinction is important, anyway. If you don't respect women 100% as much as you respect men, you're wrong. You might not have the right context if you live in a place like the US today where you might defend sexist assholes as not being that bad, but the US was really bad in the past, and much of the world is still much worse today. Women are still discriminated against in the US, though, and it is still unacceptable.
 
dandragonrage said:
Misogyny includes disrespecting a woman for having sex, paid or not, because you think she's impure. Whether she bought a reviewer or not is a valid point of discussion, but for most of the men who have commented on the situation on sites like this to devolve the discussion into what she looks like is misogyny. Doesn't matter if she had sex with someone - she's still a person and that is not invalidated here. I'm not sure if you think misogyny is only violence, but it is also disrespecting women for something you wouldn't disrespect a man for. Any discussion about her looks is uncalled for and disrespectful. Discuss the quality of her game and whether she bought reviews (in general) only. Also don't disrespect her any more than the company you probably buy games from (EA or whatever) because she is still above them no matter what she's done.

I am not a feminist, for the record. I am a humanist (disregard the stupid religious aspect of that term; it's fallen out of use and this use of the word is more logical).
Click to expand...

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/misogyny

[mi-soj-uh-nee, mahy-]

noun
1.
hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women.
Compare misandry.
Click to expand...

You don't get to redefine the English language simply because it doesn't meet your political agenda.

People criticize men on looks all the time. It is not exclusive to women. And if a man was sleeping around with women to get better video game reviews, you'd have the exact same shitstorm.
 
dandragonrage said:
To be sexist to the point where you would throw a woman out to the wolves because she's had sex qualifies plenty as misogyny to me, and I don't think the distinction is important, anyway. If you don't respect women 100% as much as you respect men, you're wrong. You might not have the right context if you live in a place like the US today where you might defend sexist assholes as not being that bad, but the US was really bad in the past, and much of the world is still much worse today. Women are still discriminated against in the US, though, and it is still unacceptable.
Click to expand...

You're missing the part where she was accused of having sex for the purposes of getting good video game reviews.

Granted, I take such allegations with a grain of salt (especially coming from an ex) and I'm not convinced that she did it for that purpose based on the paucity of evidence but to portray this controversy as solely over her having sex is, at best, disingenuous
 
dandragonrage said:
To be sexist to the point where you would throw a woman out to the wolves because she's had sex qualifies plenty as misogyny to me
Click to expand...

To be fair, if it was another guy that was having sex with a male journalist to garner good reviews and press - everyone would be just as irritated. Did she deserve to be throw to the wolves? Not my place to judge. Would I have expected anyone else to be throw to the wolves for something equal or lesser? Of course.

Two faced SJW hypocrite got caught acting in a way they should not have been to people who are known to absolutely crucify public figures for as much or less. Male, female, doesn't matter. I think it's the complete OPPOSITE of sexism, actually.
 
World of Warcraft specific publications/websites seem relatively stable compared to more general gaming journalism. Then again there are plenty of differences. Women aren't rare in WoW compared to most games, and so when they contribute to WoW related journalism, it really isn't seen as weird or out of place by anyone.
 
damicatz said:
You're missing the part where she was accused of having sex for the purposes of getting good video game reviews.

Granted, I take such allegations with a grain of salt (especially coming from an ex) and I'm not convinced that she did it for that purpose based on the paucity of evidence but to portray this controversy as solely over her having sex is, at best, disingenuous
Click to expand...

Have you actually read comments about her on this very site? Even some in this thread? Anyone who has called her a "slut" should be deported from this planet to go live on the Sun.

Now go back to your EA games. Their reviews aren't bought with sex, but with money. And by males. So it's completely okay.
 
dandragonrage said:
There are tons of amazing games from relatively moral companies that have zero of these problems. And there are tons of "gamers" who ignore these actually good games in favor of EA/Ubisoft's latest shovelware.
Click to expand...

Gamers do not buy games based on a conscious (or unconscious) desire to trumpet the moral compass of the companies that produce the games. Like most consumers, they buy the products they like, without a great deal of regard for the kind of person or company that produces it.

I was reflecting earlier on the whole "Sexism (or misogyny, for the histrionic out there) in gaming" earlier and something occurred to me. SJWs look at the gaming industry and say "Hey, we want to play too!" to which most of the industry says "Please do! More potential consumers!" The SJWs then take a different stand and say "We want to play, but we don't like the games you are producing because they feature unrealistic portrayals of women, oversexualize, are too violent, etc." The natural response from the industry (and the consumers that support it) is "If you don't like the games, why do you want to play them?"

In many cases, I don't think SJWs actually want to play games they find objectionable. What they want is for no one to like that sort of thing. To me, if you think there is a dearth of products that you would want to buy, it is up to you to create products that you WOULD want to buy and offer them to like-minded consumers such as yourself.

Instead, the effort seems to be one of shaming the majority of the market for enjoying games as they exist. Players should, as you suggested (knowingly or otherwise) seek out products from so-called "moral" companies who value people, have an acceptable carbon footprint, encourage their employees to eat more kale or some other such nonsense.

Games are an escape. They are fantasy. They run the gambit from violent to thought provoking to at times nearly pornographic. Game designers are, if they are smart, going to produce games that the largest component of the market will buy. If that means that games featuring female characters clad in bikini armor sell better, we will continue to see games featuring games with female characters clad in bikini armor.

Journalists wagging their fingers at "gamers" for liking such things and accusing them of "hating" women for enjoying games isn't going to bring out any sort of social change. Frankly, I don't see the problem, any more than Sports Illustrated's swimsuit edition features women in bathing suits.
 
dandragonrage said:
To be sexist to the point where you would throw a woman out to the wolves because she's had sex qualifies plenty as misogyny to me, and I don't think the distinction is important, anyway. If you don't respect women 100% as much as you respect men, you're wrong. You might not have the right context if you live in a place like the US today where you might defend sexist assholes as not being that bad, but the US was really bad in the past, and much of the world is still much worse today. Women are still discriminated against in the US, though, and it is still unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Of course it's important. How the public frames the issue is entirely reliant on how you word your argument. Which is why the US government purposely never used the term "genocide" when the Rwandan genocide occurred. Our government purposely avoided public scrutiny of its lack of response all because the government avoided calling it what it really was.

Choice of words has a lot of power in how listeners interpret what you are saying.
 
dandragonrage said:
To be sexist to the point where you would throw a woman out to the wolves because she's had sex qualifies plenty as misogyny to me,.
Click to expand...

You are pretending that this is the reason for the scandal. "Because she had sex and is a woman, and that's WRONG!11" What a complete strawman.

Nobody is saying that or thinking that. The Quinn controversy has nothing to do with her being a woman and having sex. Nobody cares that she slept with a bunch of dudes. That's her business.

People get pissed off, though, when social justice warriors (like YOU) come into threads like this and whine about how unfair it is that promiscuous women aren't held in high regard in human society. She's riding your predictable responses like a wave and looking down on you with contempt.

The real issue is entirely separate. It's the ethical issue of her prostituting herself to get false positive press about her game. It's ethically equivalent to paying the reviewer, in my opinion. The sex is inconsequential to the issue at hand--it further reduces her sexual market value, but it doesn't make her actions more wrong. What matters is her lies, manipulations, and corruption.
 
dandragonrage said:
Have you actually read comments about her on this very site? Even some in this thread? Anyone who has called her a "slut" should be deported from this planet to go live on the Sun.

Now go back to your EA games. Their reviews aren't bought with sex, but with money. And by males. So it's completely okay.
Click to expand...

So basically, screw free speech, anyone who disagrees with your "enlightened" opinion should be murdered by being sent into the sun.

The internet has trolls who say nasty things about both men and women. Grow a spine and get over it.
 
dandragonrage said:
Have you actually read comments about her on this very site? Even some in this thread? Anyone who has called her a "slut" should be deported from this planet to go live on the Sun.

Now go back to your EA games. Their reviews aren't bought with sex, but with money. And by males. So it's completely okay.
Click to expand...

Okay, calm down. The word "slut" is actually a synonym for "prostitute". If Zoe Quinn actually did (as has been alleged) sleep with a bunch of game reviewers solely to secure good press for her game, then by definition she is a slut.

I have no issues with someone enjoying sex, liking it, seeking it out, having it casually or any other such puritanical hangups. I don't, however, have a lot of respect for someone who buys good press for a mediocre game by seducing a bunch of people so they will say great things they otherwise wouldn't say.

And no, I wouldn't feel any differently if it was a guy who created the game who then bribed a bunch of female reviewers with sex (though, honestly, does anyone REALLY see something like that happening?).
 
With ANY product-driven magazine, if the products reviewed/tested are made by advertisers, there CANNOT be totally objectivity. We see the pattern over and over again: Magazines give glowing reviews, eventually it comes out that the product sucks, but there's never a retraction --- there are new products to review!

Games
Cars / 4x4s / Motorcycles / Bikes / Boats
Guns
Outdoor gear
Cameras / A/V gear

Et cetera.
 
damicatz said:
So basically, screw free speech, anyone who disagrees with your "enlightened" opinion should be murdered by being sent into the sun.

The internet has trolls who say nasty things about both men and women. Grow a spine and get over it.
Click to expand...

I'm all for freedom of speech, but freedom of speech isn't freedom from consequences. If you say something sexist and stupid, people may notice and start treating you like the asshole you are.
 
drlawyer said:
Okay, calm down. The word "slut" is actually a synonym for "prostitute". If Zoe Quinn actually did (as has been alleged) sleep with a bunch of game reviewers solely to secure good press for her game, then by definition she is a slut.

I have no issues with someone enjoying sex, liking it, seeking it out, having it casually or any other such puritanical hangups. I don't, however, have a lot of respect for someone who buys good press for a mediocre game by seducing a bunch of people so they will say great things they otherwise wouldn't say.

And no, I wouldn't feel any differently if it was a guy who created the game who then bribed a bunch of female reviewers with sex (though, honestly, does anyone REALLY see something like that happening?).
Click to expand...

And to clarify, I have an inherent problem with BUYING good reviews, regardless of the method of payment. I think they whole thing is disingenuous.

It is also disingenuous to suggest that people are cracking on Quinn for being promiscuous. That isn't the issue. As others have pointed out, she can have all the sex she wants with whomever she wants as often as she wants and I have no feeling about it whatsoever. I think it speaks poorly of her, however, that she designed a game that was so blasé that the only way she could get it hyped was to boink a bunch of reviewers. Do you think that reflects integrity on her part? Or on the part of the reviewers?
 
drlawyer said:
And to clarify, I have an inherent problem with BUYING good reviews, regardless of the method of payment. I think they whole thing is disingenuous.

It is also disingenuous to suggest that people are cracking on Quinn for being promiscuous. That isn't the issue. As others have pointed out, she can have all the sex she wants with whomever she wants as often as she wants and I have no feeling about it whatsoever. I think it speaks poorly of her, however, that she designed a game that was so blasé that the only way she could get it hyped was to boink a bunch of reviewers. Do you think that reflects integrity on her part? Or on the part of the reviewers?
Click to expand...

So why are these people not bitching about EA and other companies that buy a lot more reviews with a lot more money? I've been bitching about shitty companies like EA for years and I certainly don't need their products, even the few of their games that might actually be decent. Some guy replied to me earlier and said that consumers don't want to think about the morality of a company and he is right to say that consumers don't do that. But consumers are wrong for not doing that. The ultimate regulation in Capitalism is on the consumer, and the method is the boycott. We have so many government regulations (which rarely work) because people think they shouldn't have to go through life actually using their brains, so they want people to do the work for them. Our corporations and politicians are corrupt because people don't care.

But half of you fucks will just find some woman to blame it on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top