I find it kind of funny that you described Patrick Klepek exactly.

Anyway, good post/blog/thing.

Who cares? If people can't understand that video games are a large part of our culture, then they're the ones out of touch.

Well... me, obviously. Which is why I wrote this blog.

Two thoughts off the top of my head:

- "Airing dirty laundry" is not how "professionals" handle breaches in ethics or rules which is one reason why outsiders looking at video game controversy roll their eyes. Discipline them. Fire them. Or praise them. But "dig for dirt" and run to reddit or whatever to post it which serves little or no point beyond what seems to be bullying or a popularity contest (hint: stereotypically people believe children do this) is not something they really do (in public that is).

- I've long held that along with other things being missed in modern teaching curriculum is the "dialog" let alone "argument". Not enough kids are being taught by anyone (parents included) how to take an idea in their head and present it to another, often times skeptical person. Importantly, what to do when another is not convinced by your points made because almost every time one may alter the way they think about the topic but rarely does one actually achieve changing their opponent's mind. Compound to this is that the Internet supports free formed arguments and there is a lot of noise without a lot of things being learned.

Is it any wonder why people have gravitated towards "Let's Play" formatted material instead of whatever these people are complaining about? "Let's Play" are often fun videos. What has been happening instead are people who are sound like they are frothing made running around telling other people who probably don't care how horrible they believe someone is.

@sweep: I'd love to hear your distinction between Klepek and [Polygon writer].

I'm always confused at how someone like Plante will get torn to shreds on these forums for a misguided, uninformed, tabloid story while the exact same editorial, with the exact same message and tone gets a standing ovation for bravery when Patrick writes it for GB.

I'm not discrediting anyone (in this particular comment anyways) I am just genuinely curious about what sets the two apart for people.

I want to say all of this is growing pains for the industry and the community around it, but I don't know if I'm confident we'll grow out of it anytime soon.

Because cliques have decided one is good and one is bad. It is worrisome but this crowd can and will turn on Klepek too if he says something that sets them off.

Tribalism and site association, mostly.

I just think everyone's too wrapped up in "Being right" that they refuse to see the other side of the argument. Yes, there are some sketchy things that happen in games journalism, but I think people just want pounds of flesh more than anything. I guess to me, whatever points could be made from all of this are all drowned out in the screams of "I'm young and angry, and I don't know why!"

I mean, I've read my share of articles coming from all sides, but everyone's so convinced on their position, they refuse to hear any other sides of it (aka. like talking politics). Well, people wanted gaming to become mainstream. It just means we'll have mainstream problems.

Thanks for writing this, dude! You giving your actual opinions on this makes you appear human and not some insane moderation robot. As someone who likes to watch these forums from a distance, I don't want to see it become the Polygon comments section where every post is moderated if their statement isn't in line with what they want. It's straight up gross to me and I was afraid when this thing happened that these forums would turn into that. It's nice to hear that you guys are level-headed!

"The causal onlooker" has no idea any of this stuff goes on. I bet that 90% of people who play games have no idea any of this stuff goes on. Because you and I read about this stuff day in day out it's hard for us to gain a sense of perspective.

"But this ship can't sink!"

"She's made of iron, sir! I assure you, she can...and she will. It is a mathematical certainty."

I think Drew would look pretty killer in a nice suit, actually. He should just rock a full on tux for UPF!

Anyway, to the matter at hand...

Yeah, "our" "subculture" can look pretty "shitty" from time to time (including this most recent time), to those on the outside of it as well as to those on the inside of it. I personally try to listen to as many people on as many different sides as possible, and try to exist in a little Pocket Plane of knowing as much as I can, without trying to tread on too many toes.

However.

Sometimes toes just gotta get trodden on, in order for Things to Happen.

I've been pretty into it because the holier than thou attitude of certain writers has been called into question in some interesting ways

@sweep: I agree with a lot of your sentiments, particularly in the second paragraph. I want to have to the kind of frank, well rounded discussion about gender representation and ethics in journalism that most adult human beings should be capable of, but this "war" between "misogynists" and "social justice warriors" has just shattered any expectation of that happening any time soon. Given how the events of the past month have ranged from embarrassing to dirty and even illegal, I feel like the only way to win the game is to not play at all until people can learn to grow up.

I honestly wonder if the main reason why the game industry faces these cyclical bursts of user outrage is because games do largely get played the most by kids and teens with free time. So the people acting out in each instance are a fresh group that has no frame of reference for what they are doing in the larger scheme of things. The elder statesmen keep aging out of the culture and new neophytes take their place. Then those young folks that are getting their first exposure to criticism they don't like don't know how to deal with it and they lash out. But now they have the tools to lash out in an anonymous and vocal way that makes it really hard to tell who is actually upset. I'm just theory crafting here. It just makes no sense to me that a group that considers themselves looked down upon for specific, unfair stereotypical reasons would knowingly keep reinforcing those stereotypes every few months.

Exactly. There are plenty of people that don't fit the stereotype that are equally passionate, if not more passionate about games. I intensely dislike the fact that there are groups of people that proudly associate being a hateful shithead with their notion of video game purism. It feels as if these are still the loudest voices coming out of the whole video game playing culture in spite of the fact that video game culture is way more normalised and (supposedly) grown up than it ever has been before... I'm 34 and regularly play games with people in their 30s and 40s. This fact doesn't bat an eyelid from the people I work with or even family. There's no way that would have been true if I was 34 and doing so 10 years ago.

Part of me looks at the noise that these shitheads have been making and just thinks...ah well, they're a bunch of angry and frustrated teenage boys who don't know better and aren't able to reason any further than in the most binary and polarized ways. They'll grow up. They'll sort out their confused fear/lust/hatred/hormonal response toward women... just give them a little time. But then that's sort of shitty too because why should women have to endure their bullshit in the meanwhile? Then I wonder if I should step in and confront... but ultimately I think that is sort of patronizing in its own way. Best thing then, is as Patrick suggests, to make sure that you voice the positive thoughts you have when you have them... and to do so loudly on the internet. This counterbalances the negative, while also ignoring it. Best of both worlds.

Well that's just it, sometimes the stereotypical reason is actually quite true and 100% applicable. Lot's of people do stupid things every day and when the consequences come calling try to lay it off on someone else. "Gamer Culture" is not a bunch of thirty something guys/gals sitting in the living room just wanting to have fun and relax. Sure there are people who are like that who are gamers, I try to be one of them myself, but that's by far the minority. Most guys who I grew up with who grew up with games like me now only play maybe 1 MMO, only one genre like just football or soccer games, or just don't play video games at all anymore. It isn't a case of "growing" out of it either, as you get older you have more things to do and less and less personal time, and as you grow older your tastes also change. Not everyone likes the same things forever, and I do laugh every time I read a post on GB about someone not sure why they are losing their interest in games like it is something bad. People move on, that's life.

Anyway my point (minus pointless thought blurb) is that most "Gamers" are younger kids and younger kids are going to be hot heads, they are going to say some insane stuff without thinking about it first, even after doing it once they probably still won't stop to think from doing it a second time either. It is nothing new, that is how it has always been. Just now there is the internet, and it is a lot easier to be louder and more in your face than ever.

@karkarov: Yep it seems like every one of these fights amung the gaming community is with different people who have little appreciation for what has already happened. Then we have adults that have perspective arguing with kids who lack it and neither side has any idea who they are talking to. It is really the adults that get super defensive about the gamer label and gamer culture that I can't wrap my head around. But then again I can't really wrap my head around being defensive of a political or social label either.

Game journalists don't exist. They're pundits and critics and marketers. If they exist they're barely part-time journalists.

I agree with many of your sentiments, @sweep, but perhaps the one that resonates with me the most is that everyone involved in this whole ordeal has emerged looking a little worse. Well, some more than a little.

I remember when people didn't feel like you should have been moderator. Their feelings are certainly incorrect. You feel like something is wrong, and you tell it like it is. It's for that reason why you're a great one, and why I'm proud of you friend. Keep doing what you're doing, because your message is heard.

^There is the reason for your confusion. Your mistake is that you aren't taking into account people who do feel represented by certain labels and how frustrating it could be for them. It is no ones right but yours to decide your identity. If someone wants to label themselves as something, don't take that away from them.

@spraynardtatum: Certainly it can be frustrating when you are judged unfairly by a label, but that is THE downside of aligning with a faction and labeling yourself. That label connotes meanings and stereotypes both negative and positive that you cannot personally control. I don't want to take someone's right to self-label away I just want people to understand that there is always personal nuance that is lost when you choose to identify with a label. I have never been willing to put myself into a box like that because I know my beliefs and views can change and they aren't wholly contained within the bounds of a given label.

@dudeglove: Is it bad that I am hoping for society collapse?

@dudeglove: It was meant as a joke. I may be cynical and think that's where we are headed, but I don't actively hope for it.

The most reasonable thing I've read in a while. Good job.

That's fair. I think there's an honestly to Patrick which might just be a result of familiarity. The early-days Polygon manifesto is also a much harder pill to swallow - the idea that they had gathered the industry elite to form the ultimate videogame website, which was then largely ignored due to it's pretentiousness and complete lack of innovative articles. They were shouting pretty loudly and they didn't deliver. It's tough to forgive them or give them the benefit of the doubt after that. I also think they have several writers on staff who need to quietly just fuck off forever. That's just personal preference.

I was really close to not mentioning Patrick at all to be honest, because I know how quick people are to latch onto his name in any conversation, but I think he's done a good job and deserves the recognition.

I think if you're going to get your hands dirty and spend the time dividing the good from the bad then yeah, there are people who have legitimately helped and have done a great job in fighting this, but I think the overall impression that we've given off as a whole is negative. That's not to say we've condemned ourselves forever, but when my Dad is asking me who Zoe Quinn is because he read an article she wrote on the Guardian I don't particularly enjoy having to explain that "some idiots on a message board" were responsible. Because in his mind I'm one of those people. That's the problem - most people won't bother to differentiate and we all end up looking worse as a result.

I just don't agree with the whole notion that the industry "has to grow up". Games are vast and varied, having the greatest stories/gameplay and the worst. There is something for everyone. Its only natural to be annoyed when someone bangs on your head how you are a bad person for liking what you like. What happened to live and let live? Play whatever you like, discuss it with whoever you like, just don't look down on the people with different taste.

Being embarrassed to be a part of games is understandable. I don't talk about games at work much since no one here understands them. But if they were aware of all the poo-flinging I'd probably never even mention that I bought a PS4.

This was the first year where I thought about just leaving game websites for good. What was I getting out of it? Well, a ton of videos to keep me busy and some interesting forum discussions to look at when I'm bored during breaks. But the more out of hand shouting matches get, the more inevitable it is that I'll eventually be pushed away for good.

It's a shame, really. The more aggressive these people get, the more negative the gamer stereotype becomes.

@madman356647 said:

I think the main problem with that is that the opposite sides are talking about/defending different things. This is not "one side says A, the other stands for -A". While, in the end, one side seems to stand against misogyny and defend people that gets harassed on Internet (and in real life); the other side wants to talk about professional disclosure and possible corruption due to extreme familiarity. The thing is: THEY ARE NOT OPPOSITE POINTS OF VIEW. It was initially used as justification, and then got popularized by an audience that wants it discussed. Both are important conversations, and both need to happen, but they are not different sides of the same argument.

Every time someone uses one argument as a counter point of the other one, they are just using a strawman (literally, hanging a strawman to direct the defense against it). It only hurts (both) conversations... At this point, one can't argue about conflicts of interests without being accused of misogynist and one can't argue about sexism without being accused of weak minded for jumping at the defense of a corrupt system. Needless to say, both points of view are stereotypical simplifications.

The game industry is really weird because it's the only entertainment industry I can really think of where a shockingly large percentage of the critical establishment seem to actively rage whenever something goes on in it that doesn't suit them, instead of just getting what they want out of it and leaving the rest of the folks alone. Sure, plenty of people don't like Britney Spears music, but whenever she releases a new album I don't see a dozen wanky articles about how she's destroying the music industry by abiding by certain tropes and styles. At this point the people who like her music stick to listening it and the people that don't enjoy it don't listen to it, and everyone goes about their day.

I don't understand why we can't just accept video games as a broad entertainment medium that appeals to different groups of people, in some cases completely diametrically opposed, and leave it at that. The "games need to grow up" argument is stupid, to me, because everyone's definition of what "maturity" is, and what their threshold for "embarrassment" is, is different. I'm not ashamed to like music because of Justin Bieber.

Writers keep trying to corral the entire audience of video games into one big group that has to abide by one big moral standard, but every year that video games get bigger and bigger, this makes less and less sense. Everyone keeps talking about "diversity" and "letting everyone have their sandbox" but when something pops up that offends them, they try to make everyone else feel ashamed for it, and I just think that's stupid.

The reason I started thinking about this was because of Dan, funny enough. Here's a guy who wants to make videos of playing Super Mario Bros. 3 while riding a rollercoaster and talks about going to sketchy underground wrestling events and getting drunk with strangers on a party bus. And he's awesome and hilarious for it. This exists simultaneously as the gaming industry commentariat is shitting themselves over being taken "seriously" by the rest of society. But here's the rub: People want different things and there's nothing fucking wrong with that.

If someone else wants to read a deathly serious article about how Shadow of Mordor "doesn't explain the difference" between kissing and killing because you use the same prompts to do them, cool, good for you. I think it's sort of pretentious and navel-gazey, but I'm not going to try and take that away from you, I'm just not going to read those kinds of articles. Meanwhile, I want to enjoy Bayonetta making explicit poses and listening to a guy talk about "the Cinnamon Girl" without you trying to judge me by your personal moral standards. Like every other entertainment industry at this point we need to accept that different people are getting different things out of it and stop picking stupid fights.

@sweep: Polygon had some talented writers whose work was largely done in by that prevailing attitude. There are one or two people still there that I like, but I consider the site as a whole not worth visiting.

But I also know people that find Giant Bomb laughable because they perceive it as this site full of jokers that just make funny videos all day, but with that one guy on the side that pushes his politics at every opportunity. That perception gets further painted by thoughts like Jeff still being that grumpy 8.8 guy, or what have you.

What is Giant Bomb to outsiders? It's easy to fall back to the old "It's a website! About video games!" joke, but there are a lot of video game websites out there, and it's hard to define what makes one more unique or "better" than another without falling back on hyperbolic rhetoric. And in a lot of ways, Giant Bomb's strengths are also weaknesses.

I think one of the biggest problems is that term, "Game journalists". There is certain baggage that comes along with it, and it doesn't really fit in the space. Most of the people in this industry don't even refer to themselves as journalists either. It seems like it was placed upon them by the audience and now it's been perpetuated so long it stuck.

@marokai: You're always on point.

Truth be told, Giantbomb is a small web site even in the world of "video games" and miniscule in the grand scheme of "the internet of things". How much influence does GB have I can not say because influence has been eroded by multiple advancements in tech.

I feel like I'm perpetually stuck in the middle on this. On one hand some of this gamer gate stuff has a bit of a point. The stuff Quinn allegedly did is let's be frank very shitty. And its only logical that people would then start asking questions and being a bit skeptical of some of the "journalists" in the games press.

At the same time two wrongs don't make a right. Treating Quinn and others like shit and generally acting like dumb man children is the opposite of what needs to be happening here. And its very eye roll worthy when people like Ben Kuchera get on a soap box and start waving their finger at the masses like they are some noble person outing the evils of the world. I'm not embarrassed to be a gamer because frankly if people are so knee jerk to judge me or my hobby or my friends then these are the sorts of people I do NOT want to be associated with. There my be people like Leigh Alexander who shun anyone associated with giantbomb but I look at us and see a group who regularly does good for the community and the world at large. We raised like $8000 to help sick kids earlier this year all in the name of ribbing Jeff Gerstmann. The term "gamer" isn't dirty word and instead of abandoning the word and letting the assholes claim it we need to take it back. And I think that starts with personal accountability and not making everything into an us vs them fight. The goddamn games press needs to quit being such pious assholes and the gamers need to quit just being plain old assholes. Its like Dave Snider said, don't be a jerk.

Personally i find that train of thought pretty disgusting. What you're working with, unless i'm misunderstanding, is the idea that social complacency is justifiable. The problem isn't that people need to, "look the part" to be taken seriously form the outside world, the problem is the outside world needs superficial detail to determine if it's even worthy of engaging in. I feel like it's that same lazy minded train of thought that leads to your collective "...ists" and "...isms" in the first place. It's not a matter of "checking your privileges" it's a matter of "understanding your complacency" so that you may better open your mind to new ideas from places you may not be entirely comfortable with. The ideas are the important part, ideas have no identity, they can't wear suits.

Truth be told, i avoid most "videogame culture" coverage, i don't really get into the "cultural" side of things. As a grown-ass adult person i find that need for cultural identity comes from a lack of personal identity.

Enjoy painting, don't enjoy, "being a painter".

I'm certainly not presenting it as an excuse but I wonder just how much of the nonsense we've noted this year is connected to the relative sparseness of blockbuster game releases we've had? These big games would normally be made by big companies against whom vitriol is thrown with relative lack of personal impact to the recipients (if lots of people are trash talking EA for example and you happen to work there then you might feel a little defensive but you aren't going to feel personally attacked). The last year has correspondingly been a bigger than usual one for indie developers. Is it just the case that the spotlight is on these individuals and so that's where those who have vitriol to spew are spewing it? When rage is directed at people and not companies the impact is always going to be much more unpleasant and ugly.

Well said.

Fucking lol