@vonflampanker: There's always that chance, and my hope is that if something made along those lines was founded with an honest goal from the get-go, it'll be a lot harder for shitheads to co-opt the message.
Alex's forum posts
@vonflampanker: The best way is to organize thoughtfully, as far away from the communities that have been driving this nightmare forward for the last several weeks. Find the people who genuinely care about the ethics side of this and work on a way of approaching this that is honest and self-aware from the get-go. Talk to each other and make sure you're all on the same page about what your concerns are, and what you hope to achieve. Make goals. When you feel confident that you're on the same page, present what you've created. I can't speak for every journalist out there, but I know for my part I'm far from unwilling to discuss the idea of ethical improvements in our industry. Disclosure and transparency are things we think are extremely important. It's just impossible to have that conversation around the miserable tactics often employed by the people at the root of GamerGate.
@kaptainkobe: I took it as more of a plea, myself. I understand the heated emotions going on right now and I don't blame anyone for wanting the people whose job it is to cover the world of video games to make a strong statement about what's been taking place.
@cagliostro88: Giant Bomb's entire editorial direction is rooted in the personalities of the site. We post the shit we want to post. We're not required to post about things we don't care about. It is not our job to prop up every single game that comes along. It's our job to present the stuff that matters to us. Insofar as Hatred is a game that people will be able to buy at some point, it is not one I think any of us have much interest in showcasing.
Also, 2003 Alex and 2014 Alex probably would not get along with each other, if we just being honest here.
@mister_v: Because I honestly felt gross even speaking about it on twitter, because it feels like I'm giving them exactly what they likely want, which is any kind of publicity. I put my thoughts out there, and now I would very much like to never talk about it again.
@dezztroy: Dude, No Russian got a TON of media backlash. Some of it was certainly apoplectic and divorced from the reality of what the mission actually entailed, but it definitely caused backlash.
@marokai: I think you missed my point. My point wasn't that those things actually definitely justify the kind of violence those games portray. My point was that without that context, people have a much easier time looking at the violence and going, "gross."
My point was that context does make a difference, but whether that difference is enough to justify it is something I very much don't know.
@rangers517: I would implore you to look a little deeper than what you've just said. Think long and hard whether or not the kinds of critiques and pieces you're talking about actually pose any real threat to gaming. Whether the "main audience" of those sites is somehow negatively impacted by viewpoints that exist outside of their current comfort zone. Whether or not wondering "why you should care" is really where you should be stopping yourself in this conversation. Maybe the reason these perspectives are starting to flourish in greater volume is because some of us out there think they're worth hearing. Maybe in the end, this isn't about erasing your own perspective so much as it is about expanding beyond what's already been there. I promise you, there will always be sites that write about games the way you want to hear about them. Getting annoyed that others are coming in and taking the conversation in new directions maybe shouldn't be your default response. It doesn't have to be a threat. It can just be change.