What exactly do you want from games journalism?

@mastema: okay, champ. you do that.

I'm just glad @truthtellah is here to articulately state everything I want to say while I throw pithy one-liners at obvious trolls.

You don't see the irony in people trying for years to get anyone to acknowledge concerns they have had about games and the gaming community and now that some press are actually giving them attention some people angrily say they don't want to hear it? I think people wanting more folks that represent them in gaming news is understandable, but wanting people in gaming news and entertainment to shut up about what they're concerned about and stop sharing their opinions some people may dislike isn't the same thing.

Fortunately, idiots and dicks don't represent all of gaming. I'm critical of games and things in the gaming community, but I'm here because I still love games and care about the community around games. If I thought everyone was dicks, I wouldn't post here or anywhere else. If every person in gaming news and entertainment thought everyone was dicks, they wouldn't write gaming news or make fun videos for gamers. If developers thought everyone was dicks, they wouldn't make great games for gamers.

I'm aware of the cool things in the gaming community, and as a member, I've been involved in some awesome charity events. I've had fun with a wide variety of people over the years thanks to games, and I am one of the most active members on multiple gaming websites. I'm invested in this fun entertainment and community. But I can say there are problems. I feel things could be better in many ways. I think even great games can have problems, as well. Criticizing an aspect of something or someone does not mean you're out to destroy said thing. Most in the gaming press are likely not out to get you, and in my experience, they don't hate most gamers either.

We're not all the same in the gaming community, and that's the big point in all of this. If you agree that gaming should be a safe place for a wide variety of people to have fun, then you're not who most people are critical of. If you aren't in favor of harassment or being a dick to people different from yourselves, then you're not who most people are critical of. If you think it would be cool to have reasonable discussions on contentious topics, then you're not who most people are critical of.

You're not under attack. Those people you say you hate are the ones under attack. Those who angrily want to resist gaming being a safe and fun place for all kinds of game fans are the ones under attack. The kind of folks who harass me or send threats on my life just because I might talk about women in gaming sometimes are the ones under attack. Not you. If you feel some people continue to make you and others look bad, they're the ones you should be more angry at, as I am. I don't like dicks trying to take the spotlight from us either.

We're together in caring about games and wanting gaming to be a good place for the wide audience out there. So, instead of acting like I or any of these folks are your enemies, why not just enjoy games with us and we stand together against the dicks? I believe gaming is fun and empowering and most gamers are decent folks, and together, we can defend and improve upon that for everyone who wants to enjoy games and the gaming community.

I agree with you! I love Brad's enthusiasm about DOTA2 even though I don't play it, and I REALLY loved the Dark Souls enthusiasm that inexplicably swept gaming journalism late last year since those games are some of my favorites ever. I prefer getting information from reviewers/streamers/LPers/journalists who get deep into one or a handful of games and are very knowledgeable about them. However, there is obviously a segment of the gaming audience who views such things as indicators of being biased or nonobjective, so understandably it is really difficult for journalists to find a balance that most people agree with. That's why I don't think it is really fair to criticize any particular viewpoint... well, except the idea of super-objective/unbiased reviews which seems kind of ridiculous to me since games are such a subjective medium.

Praise the sun!

Thanks, Milkman! This is obviously a difficult topic for an impersonal medium like online messages; so, we'll never be perfect at how we communicate things. But you can give it your best shot.

Though, I will say I think that person you're talking to is probably someone thinking they're funny and perhaps playing a ridiculous part. Or they're very young. Either way, it's a distraction from more reasonable folks.

@golguin: I'd love to see more hype, as well. I do see it more than some people seem to notice, but it does always make me happy to get kind of excited about a game. I mean, I'm an unrepentant shill for Shovel Knight. That game is fantastic!

And The Last of Us? Hoo-doggy, that's a game just about everyone should play at some point. I also think it's imperfect in many ways, but that doesn't mean it isn't still something I like to keep bringing up. Heck, I like the recent game Akiba's Trip, and that game has a lot that bothers me in it. But it also does a lot right, and that makes me jazzed just thinking about it. I may soon write a blog post about some things that concerned me in it, but I still regard it as one of my favorite games to come out this year so far. If people like some silly fun, it's a great game to check out.

One thing I often dig about Nintendo-specific outlets is their boundless enthusiasm for Nintendo games. You obviously have to take things from them with a big grain of salt (who don't you, right?), but it's still nice to see a lot of excitement around games. Same thing goes for watching new games on Twitch or big game tournaments. I think there's room for all kinds of different takes on games, but hype can certainly be fun.

I'm glad that criticizing things and enjoying them are not mutually exclusive. Let's have fun with games -and- talk about every part of them. :)

@truthtellah

You don't see the irony in people trying for years to get anyone to acknowledge concerns they have had about games and the gaming community and now that some press are actually giving them attention some people angrily say they don't want to hear it? I think people wanting more folks that represent them in gaming news is understandable, but wanting people in gaming news and entertainment to shut up about what they're concerned about and stop sharing their opinions some people may dislike isn't the same thing.

I certainly don't want the discussion to vanish. It would be a sad thing if it did, and it would be disingenuous. However, the controversy revolving Quinn and the complete radio silence doesn't help either. By not looking at all issues equally, and picking and choosing battles based on which members of their clique might be hurt, it creates an atmosphere of distrust. Are gaming journalists really concerned about discrimination in the work place, or are they simply trying to project a sense of moral superiority over the masses, to the point of being willing to silence anything or anyone that doesn't fit the narrative? Without the willingness to look inside itself, the gaming media looks hypocritical in the extreme. I don't speak for others, but what I want most of all in gaming journalism is fairness.

Fairness when talking about the gaming community. All of the gaming community, not just the parts they hate.

Fairness when talking about the games they're reviewing, previewing, showing off, regardless of who developed them or where they're from. Most of the time, you can tell when the crew has decided they're going to hate the game they're looking at within the first minute of a QL, even if it's not been in their hands very long. That has to change.

Fairness when discussing relationships in the industry. The GB crew, to their credit, didn't review Bastion, and were at least up front about liking the guys that made it when they spent disproportionate time gushing over it. Honestly, though, I'd go a step further - if you have a personal relationship with a developer of any game, you shouldn't be talking about said game at all, lest the question of integrity comes up.

Fairness in editorial content. It's okay to have opinions, but it shouldn't be to the point of dismissing anyone with a differing opinion (outside of absolute dickbags, of course). Not everyone who's concerned about the increasingly violent nature of gaming is a censorship advocate. Not everyone who doesn't buy games via digital distribution is a luddite. Such inflammatory dismissal of other opinions only makes the industry look even more insular.

Lastly, fairness in news coverage. If you're going to sit on your soapbox and rant about issues that you have with the community, at least have the guts to look inward and not try to silence legitimate concerns.

I don't think I'm asking too much. Just be fair, and the people who aren't dicks won't complain. The people who are dicks will complain regardless, but they're not the ones who matter.

You can't be saying that Giant Bomb hates their readership/viewers? They have absolutely been critical of misogynistic idiots (to take one example) that sometimes are a part of their audience, but thats a good thing and doesn't mean that they hate their entire audience.

I agree. Dan and his Taco Bell propaganda needs to stop.

@yukoasho: I think those are suggestions to consider, and presented like that, you certainly don't represent those that they and others dislike so much.

Though, I'd say that they don't have to agree with you. I don't think I have to agree with you either, but we can definitely talk about the practicality or quality of such suggestions. If all you want is a better sense of fairness, we can discuss what fairness means to us. I can't guarantee that they or I will be convinced by you, but if we're civil about it, I'm sure we can at least understand each other and our thoughts on it better.

Personally, I like that gaming news people are fans like us with their own preferences and opinions. I don't mind that they have their feelings on games and prefer different things. Ultimately, we knowing more about their preferences helps me better understand their coverage and get a good frame of reference for what I am and am not interested in on their sites. For example, I know Jeff is a certain way about games, and Brad is different. So, their impressions of games will vary. Their reviews will probably vary a decent bit, too. Because they're different people not trying to suggest their opinion is objective or perfectly "fair".

I do think more disclosure of relationships is important, particularly with indie developers. I don't believe it has really had a significant impact on coverage or reviews, but I can appreciate why some may feel it could. So, reassuring them and giving us more information about their ties to people would be fantastic. If Giant Bomb decided to disclose even more about their relationships with various devs, I'd say, more power to them. I think this is one of the potential positives to come out of the recent kerfuffle.

Making clearer that you're not just dismissing folks who disagree with you is certainly well worth pursuing, as well. I can understand the impulse, as people say some pretty nutty things to me all the time, but a lot of people also hold reasonable differences which I can consider. I may not agree, but it does help to not just appear to be closed to them. I think this is something most people could improve on, and it can be particularly difficult in raw text online. Still, outlets can encourage their writers to improve the content of their opinion pieces for the sake of not giving people the wrong impression.

And I'd agree about having a clear willingness to question yourself. Frankly, that's a drum I've been beating for years now both for gaming news and the gaming community. Well, and people in general. We shouldn't treat ourselves as sacred, and we should be willing to question and explain ourselves. I do think this is something some outlets have lacked over time. Or, at least, they are not transparent enough about their questions and self-reviews. If only to reassure people, it would be helpful for people in gaming news to acknowledge at times their imperfections and need for viewer input. The relationship between the community and industry folk is important, and while some people have all too often soured that relationship, I think it's something worth continuing to work on. It's still a learning process for all of us, but over time, we can strike a good balance with each other as a community of people that care about games.

Of particular note is the value of accepting difference and disagreement. Disagreement with some gamers and disagreement with outlets. We don't have to be so contentious. Unfortunately, there is still a volatile mixture of unreasonable and reasonable concerns which fuel a lot of distrust and anger. For most gamers, this isn't an issue, and they continue to have a fine relationship with those writing gaming news and entertainment. But for vocal people, especially some of those who participate in online gaming communities and feel like they used to be the primary target audience of gaming news and devs, there are clearly some issues to work on.

I don't think people in gaming news or developers have to acquiesce to every gamer demand or every gamer has to agree with the opinions of everyone in gaming news and entertainment, but we can at least work on practical ways to build greater trust and try to just have more fun with one another. It's gaming, after all. A lot of people take it a bit too seriously. We should be having fun, right? Fortunately, I think we can both have expressions of criticism and concern and a great deal of fun and excitement in gaming. The audience surrounding games is wider and more diverse every day, and it's natural that we may have conflicts like this over different perspectives and directions. We can work through them, and for the sake of the games and community we care about, we will continue to do so in our own haphazard, imperfect way.

Hi, this is a little bit tangential, but I'd just like to make the point here that most discrimination takes the form of unconscious, internalized, biases and that just because you honestly believe men and women should be treated equally does not make you immune to being a giant sexist. I say this as a former giant sexist who thought he was too smart to be so biased.

It's easy to be overly critical or dismissive towards a certain group of people without even realizing you're doing it. Ignoring or downplaying the unique struggles that other people might face is also very easy to accidentally do. If someone is calling you sexist or racist, don't immediately brush them off as being crazy just because you don't overtly hate people for their sex/race.

Also, @mastema, if you keep talking like that nobody will ever take you seriously.

Truthtellah, reviewers are NOT just fans like us with they're own tastes and opinions. They're politicians. Isn't that the problem?

@kentonclay: Whether you choose to heed my word is not of my concern, son of man. I am the voice of the Lord, his vessel upon this rotten earth. What I speak is the truth, and I will only save those who wish to hear it.

No?

heh. From all I've seen over the years, most of them are just fans like us who happened to go into formally writing about games. If this is about having concerns about games or the gaming community and feeling like you can or should express them, then that's a very fan thing. I mean, I'm a gaming fan, and I have plenty of opinions I am interested in sharing.

Depending on how I feel about something, I may say, "Yeah, this game came out," or "Woohoo! This game came out!" That's my own personal preferences impacting how I present information. As a fan of gaming, I may even feel like expressing my opinion on women or social issues, but that doesn't make me a politician. Game outlets usually like to focus on opinion in particular pieces or reviews, but that's up to them. Ultimately, them expressing opinions on every aspect of games is a very fan thing to do, and I support them doing so.

The problem some people seem to have as of late is gaming news writers and reviewers not having the same opinions or preferences as they do, and that being reflected in their coverage and reviews doesn't sit well with them. They aren't the "right kind" of gaming fans, as it were.

To me, they appear to be normal gamers writing about games in more formal settings. The growth of the Internet and people sharing their own comments, blogs, and videos about games has made that clearer than ever. The myth of gaming review objectivity has flitted away along with the idea of game reviewers as distinct, separate entities from normal gamers.

People in the gaming industry are flawed, different folks with their own preferences like us. They just happen to be gamers that write about or make games for a living.

@truthtellah said:

I think if more of them simply presented themselves as such, there would be less animosity.

I bought a video game magazine last week because it had a picture of Miyamoto on the front.

So, yeah.

There's so many voices out there with regards to reviews that you can still reach a solid consensus on a product without worrying too much about personal bias.

I'd like games journalism to tell me if a game is worth my time or not, and leave all the social justice warrior stuff for more informed debate rather than the half assed bandwagon jumping type that so much of it seems to be at the moment.

Perhaps! I don't know if that's really how people would respond, but I imagine most would consider themselves that way and not mind saying so. I know it's something many appreciate with the Giant Bomb crew. They are usually quite good at being open about just being gamers who chose this cool line of work.

Most developers I've known regard themselves as normal gamers, and as far as gaming news writers, the ones I've talked to consider themselves to be gamers that sometimes have journalism degrees. heh. Of course, that isn't always clear, especially online. In person, it's far easier to see, but in cold text, it can be easy to see something else. It's easier to see antagonists or representations of stereotypes of what one dislikes than the people behind the words.

I wouldn't mind more gaming industry folks being clearer on what big, flawed, dorky gamers with their own preferences that they are. It's probably not really something they're hiding as much as they may not feel it's something that needed to be said. Regardless, it could be helpful to make that even clearer for the audience around them.

(Full Disclosure: I once played Animal Crossing with Tina Amini of Kotaku; so, I can confirm she is a totally dorky gamer who probably loves AC way more than I do.)

Goodness, it's late at night. And I even forgot to eat dinner. Too wrapped up in Internet arguing, right? Dangit.

Well, I better eat a snack and get some rest. Please be awesome and keep the thread from needing to be locked. I'll be back to talk with yall on all this later! ♥

This "gamergate" thing has made me lose any interest in gaming journalism as a medium. The incredible amount of evidence that have piled up at this point highlighting the blatant corruption and "favours" for buddies is just too much, and the response from the media has been beyond poor. The silence has been deafening.

I actually felt angry at the Royal Rumble at Pax this weekend when Maya Kramer came on stage.

Agreed. (not surprised that she was there, though, it was free publicity.) I kind of feel sad for Klepek considering how proud he's been of "making industry connections" that were actually just using him as a handy mouthpiece.

All of this gamer gate shit is wearing me out but I am intrigued about this. What happened exactly?

I want the Giant Bomb staff to do whatever they love to do. If that is "serious journalism" or food tasting, or a college tour, or Formula 1, or wrestling, or whatever, it doesn't matter, as long as they love doing it. Because that passion will shine through and connect with the audience, even if you aren't that interested in the subject.

I came here (Gamespot) for "gaming journalism" but I stay here (Giant Bomb) because of the personalities and their passion.

This is one video making certain claims about the situation.

I really dislike how unfocused and speculative it is, though. At one point saying that so and so was friends with such and such, and then repeatedly saying that they had sex. Speculation helps no one in a time like this. Just substitute X is close friends with Y, every time you hear a speculative X is having sex with Y.

But if you pay 99 dollars to get your game into an indie game contest, and judges don't have to play your game to completion, play your game, or even install your game, that is a massive issue. And if the actual facts about who is friends with who are true, that is also a pretty big issue. It's like finding out that most of the girls who won a local beauty contest had the woman running the contest as their grade school teacher, and that she is good friends with their girl scout leader.

If the connections really are there, that's pretty unethical. It would be nice for an actual journalist to investigate this.

Game journalism thinks we are there for their "writing", "opinions" and god forbid, reviews.

Youtube, twitch have now proven we were there all along only for the videos, trailers, interviews lol

Like all good journalism, try not to bring attention to yourself. Since "gamers are over" as far as the journalists are concerned atleast have a laser focus on games. Now that it is well proven that panelists are as clueless as the audience they are talking down to (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGiUHF2iqkY), try real hard next time. Until then, have fun talking to my adblock extension.

This is 100% how I feel. Let them do what they want If I like it I like it if I don't I don't.

@sweeneytodd: I'm disappointed with Patrick to be honest. He's one of the only people who have a voice in all of this, and he's been completely silent. It appears to me that he's a part of it all. I don't care about the "SJW" shit we see every day; this isn't about that. It's about journalistic integrity, of which there is none it seems. I quite frankly think the way everyone has handled this has been pathetic, Giant Bomb included. I love this site and find endless amount of entertainment here, but this is big and you can't just sweep it under the rug, especially not when the most prominent writer/journalist on staff appears to be connected to everyone involved.

It's disgusting. I can't really explain it in any other way. No one appears to have the integrity to stand up to anyone - this is exactly how the main-stream media works now; they're afraid of losing access, so that just stay silent on real issues.

Has the GB staff said anything about this other than like "Ugh this is awful" on their personal twitter accounts? I'm not super active on the forums but I have not noticed anything.

@strohfist: Nope. They're obviously trying to downplay it, along with the rest of the gaming press.

Patrick did a blog IIRC, but it basically was exactly what you said. "Ugh this is bad, but stop treating Zoey Quinn like this".

@strohfist: Jeff made a comment on disclosurehere on the forums, but beyond that I've only seen comments on Twitter and I believe Patrick on his personal blog.

The stuff coming out about IGF is interesting but it's a shame that it's being presented in the way it is. Having said that, it's something I'd like to see an actual journalist look into and present a piece on.

Here's the thing I'll never understand. The whole "games journalists hate games" thing. I'm a gamer, I don't feel hated. Do you know why? I'm not a dick on the internet to people.

It seems many people in this community journalists, developers and gamers alike could benefit from a skeptical viewpoint. Don't take everything you read and hear at face value. Research things and you'll have a more well rounded and factually accurate viewpoint.

The Carl Sagan quote "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" applies here while many claims made aren't extraordinary. Any claim should be provable.

And less zealotry on all sides!

Civil discourse, provable claims and skepticism.

That sucks. While I guess I see a certain merit in some instances to the adage "not feeding the trolls" I think in this particular case it would be immensely helpful for for the GB staff to take a stand, especially in light of some of the attitudes that are present even on this site. Really sad that this topic - one that definitely merits further discussion, is not a sticky or at least at the top of the forum at all times.

Patrick is too close to this story to comment, and that's kind of the point people are trying to make. He would either hurt a friend by saying something negative, or fan the flames by only defending her. I don't blame Patrick at all for staying out of this, and I thank the staff and moderators for allowing us to have this conversation.

Concerning the rest of game journalists however, it's absolutely an issue that no one is talking about this. People clearly don't want to burn bridges, and that is a problem. It also doesn't matter if you label yourself "journalist" or "reporter" or just say "hey man, I just talk about video games," no self-description somehow makes it more ethical for you to ignore an entire side of an issue, or continue to paint that side of the issue with an increasingly broad and insulting brush.

I think for GB is best to stay away from this mess. They are not involved in it. Making a stand will only agitate one or the other side of the community.

http://kotaku.com/5914348/three-words-i-said-to-the-man-i-defeated-in-gears-of-war-that-ill-never-say-again

Would like to point out that this is what Kotaku pumps out almost daily. I can't even begin to explain how ridiculous that article is, but this is what's apparently catagorized as "gaming journalism" now.

When did gaming become a prime platform for gender equality debates? I don't get it. What the hell does an article like that have to do with anything? And why is it on KOTAKU?

EDIT: Did not know picture is a fake. Been reading a lot of Kotaku lately because of all this and just wanted a quick picture for this, and oddly enough it didn't strike me as fake as it wasn't anything worse than a lot of the stuff I've read lately.

The side that will be agitated is the side in the wrong. The threatening and harassment of women is objectively vile and not taking a stand makes one complicit in the maintenance of the status quo, which at this point is the exclusion of women from the gaming community at large through the a fore mentioned means.

@dokaka: Dude be skeptical, a quick Google will let you know that article never has existed.

@strohfist:

This isn't about women in gaming anymore, it's about the rampant corruption throughout the gaming media, indie-developers and so on.

Yes, there's a problem with sexism in the community, but this has evolved into something else. You can't have people in a tigh-nit group handing out indie-game awards to friends, do promotion for their games because you've had sex and so on and then yell "MISOGYNISTS!" when you're called out on it.

@dokaka:

Please don't post kotaku parody images. There are enough examples of actual social justice articles on Kotaku that are somewhat questionable. Use those to make your point.

@dokaka: You do realize that it is not a real article do you?

edit: @spaceinsomniac said it before me.

I agree

@spaceinsomniac: apologies, did not know it was fake. It oddly enough fit in as I'd been reading a lot of Kotaku lately because of this scandal.

I disagree...it still is absolutely about women in gaming...and the pervasive attitude towards women in general everywhere. I really think any hypocrisy or nepotism in the gaming industry should be treated as a side note to what I see as a much, much larger issue.

It is a bigger issue overall, but we're talking about gaming. We're never going to eradicate sexism from all of society by attacking people reading gaming sites, it doesn't work like that. When the media is so corrupt, how are we going to trust anything they spew out? They can't fight the good fight when people can't take their word for anything. These people have directly been at fault for companies going under because of their nepotism, it's insane.

You know why nobody is taking the "gamergate" thing seriously? Because there's nothing to it. It's why everyone IN the industry is mocking it and pretty much every article from people OUTSIDE of the the industry amounts to "Dumb angry nerds continue to be dumb and angry."

Everyone knows everyone, just like Hollywood. Only If this was Hollywood, it would ALL be considered tabloid-level garbage that nobody would even blink at.

@kentonclay: 100% agree

I've yet to see ANY compelling evidence that there is anything to this other than gossip about people's private lives.