Destiny is OK, though I'm by no means committed to it. I play it once every few days, usually mixing up story missions with patrols and Crucible. I'll keep at it, but not sure I have the time or inclination to get good at the MP or level up past 20. Have a sneaking suspicion that "social"-focused gaming is not for me. Been playing Shadow of Mordor instead, and having more fun exploring the world without feeling I'm in some sort of competition with other players.
stryker1121's forum posts
To quote from Scarface, 'It's your tree, Frank, you're sittin' in it."
Can't feel too much empathy for the guy. Pure idiocy and another brick in the 'gamers are angry, entitled idiots' wall of shame.
@spacekatgal: The biggest difference between you and the posters here is we can air our thoughts anonymously w/o fear of reprisal. If I can be selfish, I'm hoping that you and other women in the industry stay top-of-mind and on the front pages of places like the New York Times, even if that means even more exposure to those sharpening their claws, waiting for you to slip up. I feel very weird saying that, as the bile you've been exposed to is unconscionable. However, harassment can't be ignored, it must be faced directly and dragged into the public consciousness. Please don't take this the wrong way.
Is it normal for enthusiast press to have some sort of ethics policy to follow? I'm a journalist, been in the business for 15 years (freelancing now), and my old newspaper adopted an ethics policy about six or years after I was hired. It followed SPJ guidelines, with addendums concentrating on conflicts of interest, like having a political sign in your yard. We weren't even allowed to sign petitions of any sort, which twisted some knickers. Has GB ever put a stance out there on this topic, officially or otherwise?
Every site I've written for has had a policy (which mostly mimics SPJ guidelines). Not all of them are public. I've actually seen a lot of people saying GG might go away if sites would "post an ethics policy and stick to it," but Polygon has a link to their ethics policy at the bottom of every review and they've remained one of GG's primary targets regardless. (Joystiq is another site that comes to mind with a detailed policy that's online.)
Did polygon have that before Ben Kuchera covered depression quest without saying anything about supporting her through Patreon? Was Kotaku's in place before Patricia wrote about a bunch of Anna Enthropy's stuff without mentioning they were roommates?
I know someone will tell me that it doesn't matter but let's look at this realistically. Depression Quest (and all of Zoe Quinn's games) are free. All of Anna Anthropy's games are free. 99% of people who play games have never heard of, much less played, any of these games. I can not fathom why anyone would get worked about these games receiving allegedly "corrupt" promotion. It's insane. Who cares?
Escapist's story regarding "on message" coverage of Shadow of Mordor seems much more up the street of anyone trying to weed out corruption within the industry.
Is it normal for enthusiast press to have some sort of ethics policy to follow? I'm a journalist, been in the business for 15 years (freelancing now), and my old newspaper adopted an ethics policy about six years after I was hired. It followed SPJ guidelines, with addendums concentrating on conflicts of interest, like having a political sign in your yard. We weren't even allowed to sign petitions of any sort, which twisted some knickers. Has GB ever put a stance out there on this topic, officially or otherwise?
@stryker1121: Wow... are you serious? Coincidence would be a couple man, but 12? Think about it, you're telling me 12 completely different people all decided, on their own, to essentially write the exact same article, the exact same day linking to the exact same blog post? Some of the leaked JournoGamePros emails showed a lot of them (not GiantBomb) talking about how to pissed they were about ZQ's personal life being exposed and how to deal with it and how to respond. Look, you're entitled to your own opinion, but I'm entitled to mine as well. I'm just saying look a little deeper. Am I connecting dots that really aren't there? Some might say that, but if it turns out I'm wrong someday I'm more then willing to admit it.
Can't believe you're so surprised i'm serious about this. If the 'collusion' were real, what would be the end-game for scheming to bash the userbase? To neuter 'real' gamers to bring in the new, larger wave of "SJW" gamers that are overtaking the old guard?(Yes, I've seen this theory floated). What dots are you trying to connect?
I'm surprised more of you don't seem to think atleast "something" fishy is going on with the games media these days, but I suppose if you don't dig much, or at all, I guess, then you wouldn't think anything is going on. And don't get me wrong, I don't see GiantBomb as being corrupt or colluding with anyone as I'm well aware when your friends with people.
But currently, video game media as a whole? Come on... I'm not going to get to deep into details here, but what about the day 12 video games media sites all released similar story's that essentially said the same thing (the term gamer is dead), in a 24 hour period, all pointing to the exact same blog post? Is that not collusion? or atleast really, really fishy? Again I'm not implicated GiantBomb in this as I don't think they released an article that day, just saying this as games media as a whole.
Like everyone got together after this blew up and said, "Let's bash gamers?" I don't think so...more so people in the industry defending friends being attacked, or sick of dealing with the underbelly of the gaming culture that's been rising for years, and the ZQ stuff was the last straw. Debate on whether the games' media is too close to those they're covering is perhaps worth discussion, but suggesting some kind of overarching, concocted movement to crush their userbase does not make sense. It's coincidence, not conspiracy.
Right on. I had a favorite online movie reviewer who started giving a feminist slant to her reviews. I wasn't interested in the direction the site was going, so I moved on to other places like AV Club and Red Letter Media. Simple, no drama and no wrong-headed twitter campaign.
Good for you. The great irony for me that has come out of this nonsense is that I really did not enjoy Polygon before gamergate was a thing. I rolled my eyes at their clickbait titles. Even though I feel strongly in support of a lot of social issues politically, I often found some of their dissection of games to be a bit too much. But still, I'd roll my eyes and move on if I came across an article I disagreed with or thought was flat out stupid. But I find myself on "their side," if you can even qualify sides. So gamergate has had the opposite of their desired effect for me.
Yes, I wouldn't want GB to come at games from a social justice POV, either. But I'm all for more articles about the state of the industry not just for women, but for other minorities as well. There's some good work that can be done that doesn't interfere with the fun-loving heart of the site.