Coffee 'n Cameras 'n Q&As: 09/04/2014

"I never knew Ryan but when he passed I felt like I lost a friend"

"you and me both"

Maybe a poor choice of words. I'm pretty sure you knew Ryan.

24:00 - What a very sad reality this social climate around games has turned into. Because of random insane people on the internet have who have nothing better to do than terrorize the people they disagree with, individuals within the industry are afraid to speak out due to apprehension of their familiy's safety as well as their own.

I just...man. what. the. hell.

Great video Patrick. I always enjoy these Q and A's you and Jeff do.

@patrickklepek:

lol, we've all been there.

@patrickklepek Awesome to hear you are a friend of Sigur Ros and Explosions in the Sky. You should check out This Will Destroy you. I personally am a big fan of all three bands and I feel like you would really enjoy the, They are similar to Sigur Ros and EITS but a little on the darker side. Would love to hear your thoughts. I highly recommend checking out the tracks This World Is Our ___, A Three-Legged Workhorse, The Mighty Rio Grande, or They Move on Tracks of Never Ending Light. If you respond to me It would make my week.

Damn, that bump on his head is super distracting.

Well spoken!

Patrick likes Sigur Rós, this is great news.

@patrickklepek I'm afraid the only solution to your monitor problem is to buy a third monitor.

While I understand Patrick's feeling of "We can have this conversation later because bigger, badder things are happening", it just seems like an emotional response more than anything else. The personal information being leaked for various people is horrible, but that doesn't mean we can't talk about anything else. It just feels like an easy way to avoid having any conversations about the other topics because you can just brush it off as "Well this thing that is happening is worse, so let's not talk about it right now."

The truth is, the people who are doing these horrible things to other people -- exposing personal information, death threats, etc. -- they probably aren't even a part of the conservation and probably have no interest in conversing about it. So, while we all agree it's horrible, why do we have to drop every other discussion in favor of sitting around and agreeing that what happened to them is horrible? It lacks all logic and it just seems like a way to avoid having conversations about any other issues.

That all being said, I actually don't give a crap about games writers hanging out with developers and such, because I'm not concerned whether "the reviews are honest or not" garbage that some people get hung up on. I more so want to have a conversation about how games writers will defend developers or hold back their opinions just because they're friends with someone. Or that most of the games press live in such a bubble, and they only hang out with other people who share their opinions, so they always think they're on "the right side" of the conversation and if someone disagrees, then they lump all those who disagree into the same category and then write them off. They actively will try to silence those that disagree and say that "If you disagree with us, then your opinion isn't even worth hearing. You don't need to be part of this conversation."

I'm not saying Patrick has done that (not to my knowledge at least) but it happens a lot and I don't see other people in the games press calling out each other for that kind of dishonest nonsense, and I think that's a major problem.

Well said, as always, Patrick.

Thanks for your insightful and well-spoken thoughts Patrick!

The biggest problem here?

Us consumers are fucking hypocrites.

The truth of the matter is that the same people who say that they want more openness within the industry also say that they don't like people critiquing the things that they love, often in any shape or form let alone on gender of fairness fronts. Likewise we say that we don't want personal relationships between press and developers colouring the way games are publicised or promoted, while at the same time ignoring the fact that often the best coverage of games comes about precisely because of those relationships. We want to have our cake and eat it.

As Patrick highlights very clearly in this video there are innate contradictions in the #gamergate movement (or whatever you wish to call it) that have allowed it to be so easily co-opted by the most unsavoury elements along us. As such we need to accept that thinking in any way that the abuse that has/is happening does not matter or only muddies the water of the real issue of industry corruption (as if the world we live in is actually some kind of anime version of the cold war) completely invalidates any argument we may have had in the first place. In many respects it's exactly the same thing as someone who does not like the idea of our military/political activities in the Middle East justifying their stance by supporting jihadists that behead people, because in the round these extremists have the same world view as them. In short, tacit support for the actions that have been going immediately kills any validity your cause may have had.

The best answer I have seen to all of this is the call for people who dislike the status-quo to put their money where their mouth is and start their own guerilla press. Walk the walk and do things your way. Fact is though, nobody will every do this because when push comes to shove we are just spineless consumers, happy to snipe from the sidelines, see conspiracies where there are none (or at least to the degree that is anyway realistic), and support the vilest radicals if it helps to prop up our own meticulously build preconceptions.

So basically what I am saying is; fuck us all - we have the industry we deserve.

@theinvinciblemark: I agree, especially on the sample size, but the only other study I could find (positive or negative) was the IRC one that the article mentions, and I think IRC from almost a decade ago is even farther away. It'd be nice to have a more general test... Maybe I could write a script to grab some data for a night. I could at least see the relative use of gendered insults really easily.

Hmm... if TotalBiscuit counts as a british celebrity then maybe people just really want to harass male british celebrities.

EDIT: Ah, just re-read your comment and you said "anyone" and not "everyone" like I thought. I'd disagree there. I think "celebrity" is very relative. If I met Jeff or Patrick on the street I'd react as though they were a celebrity, whereas if I met Kim Kardashian or Kanye West or someone, I wouldn't recognize them at all.

Even that article admits that the sample size was incredibly small and focused only on British celebrities. I doubt anyone involved in this case would have qualified as a celebrity by their definition.

@drabnon: Hey, I wasn't coming in trying to make anything ok by saying that it happens to men too. I was just giving you the real answer to your questions. You were the one saying that it never happens to men.

And Max is a person who develops games... I think that qualifies him as a game developer.

Recent studies have actually found that in most cases, men are harassed more often than women online. (with Journalism being the exception where they weren't)

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/04/men-are-harassed-more-than-women-online.html

Thank you for not supporting patreons that, at the very least, look bad. It really means a lot to hear something like that. This site has handled the last few weeks better than any other major gaming site that I have read pieces on.

The only reason you are talking about it is because of hateful people. That is the whole point of Patrick's argument. How do people not see this is a good thing.

Come back in a month and maybe the death threats will have died down, if you still care, rad.

Sometimes not commenting on something is the best way to address it. I agree completely with how GB handled this death threat riddled bus-fire. If you want to rubberneck then I'm sure there are plenty of places that you can go and speculate.

Since you're reading this Patrick, a great way to keep up on new music is by listening to NPR's All Songs Considered podcast. Some great stuff there that also helps you be hip and relevant in conversations with people who are armpit-deep in that stuff!

@koriar: I don't know, Max is only really tangentially related to the game industry. And Phil Fish being targeted like that was awful. But it always feels like the women get the short end of the stick. Whether it's being specifically targeted by people who hack them or randomly being harassed just for playing a game and having a girl's voice. I don't think it's too much of a leap to say that this harassment has a much more intense and more gender-focused agenda. I don't think it only happens to women, but with women it's so much more consistent. When people disagree with a male journalist or game dev the chance of them being attacked like this is so much lower. When people disagree with a female in the industry, you can always count on rape and death remarks. Saying "Hey, it happens to guys too" is kind of missing the point.

@drabnon: I agree that everything is depressing, but the answers to your questions certainly aren't "They haven't."

A month ago Max Temkin was being (apparently falsely) accused of rape, and a year ago Phil Fish left the industry due to harassment the first time.

These are high profile examples, but I've seen others over the years, mostly leaving quietly because it seems like nobody cares. Based on your post, they're right. Nobody does.

The only reason you think that this only happens to women is because there haven't been high profile men (that I'm aware of) who have successfully channeled their harassment into a PR / fundraising campaign.

What's incredible about ISIS and the latest and tragic news of the journalists murdered were the journalists who wanted to get in the country. They knew they were placing themselves in danger. They realized it but they wanted to get back in because they wanted to report what was happening. They wanted the world to know what the citizens who were displaced were doing. They wanted to do their job.

Nobody deserves death threats, doxxing, or harassment.

I can't imagine why somebody would do such a thing but as an extreme, it is louder than legitimate questions and will not stop.

People are searching articles, twitter posts, and more trying to find connections. Legitimate or maybe a stretch, but when the websites delete posts, ban and write articles that take the side of being victims and lumping all gamers as deranged, the shouting gets louder and again, extremists choose to harass, dox, and send death threats.

Twitter is a horrible place to discuss anything serious. What is happening are people using their followers and retweets to fan the flames, like children who feel like they need to have the last word and win.

As a website that has a lot of respect, you guys can be one of the loudest to just clear the air. Let everybody know how the Giant Bomb sausage is made.

And did the writer then proceed to review Jewel's latest album without ever mentioning the tour escapades? I somehow doubt it.

Good reporting in games writing would be great. What we get are people making stories out of single tweets (hi, kotaku), opinion pieces and product reviews/marketing.

More actual journalism would be FANTASTIC. Only thing is, if you're one of the people that goes between doing product reviews and other stuff, which is most people writing about games, if you during the course of your job get close to a developer, maybe don't review that person's game.

The whole issue depresses me. Just everything about it. I hate that females get so much more hate than men on the internet. When was the last time a male game dev's sex life was publicly shown to everyone? The last time a male journalist was harassed to the point of leaving the fucking industry? They haven't, because that's shitty to do to someone. I don't get why that doesn't apply to women. Regardless of what mistakes any of these females in the industry have made, it is nothing compared to the amount of retribution they've received. I understand wanting accountability in journalism. I get wanting disclosure. But the whole #gamergate has just made things worse. It's eliminating female journalists from the industry, an already endangered breed. And who the fuck is going to replace them? As Patrick said, it's increasingly hard to support yourself. "Game journalist" is not a desirable job. What happens when we chase away all of these people because of any perceived corruption? The reason these people became game journalists wasn't because of the pay. They did it because they're fucking passionate about games. They love (or hate) them enough to write about them. If they get attacked enough to mentally break them down, games will be worse for it. We need more female voices in games, not less. The amount of harassment they've received is just another reason on an already huge list of why not to be a games journalist. But fuck them, because they're friends with someone who cheated with some guys. What a horrible fucking crime. Sorry for coming off as ranting, I just had to get this off my chest.

Hey Patrick, you mentioned Dynasty Warriors and why people like it, and well...I've played it for 10 years starting from 4. It's definitely simple in terms of combat, but there is a depth to it. Each sequel borrows from the last like, say, a Call of Duty sequel would. However, unlike Call of Duty, each sequel keeps a majority from the past game in terms of movesets, characters, costumes.

As for what Genre, I would say beat 'em up. Like the old Double Dragon and Final Fight games. Literally that, the best possible way a genre can transition. So on to the systems-In the newest one, you have Weapon switching(Switches movesets), the basic Square/Triangle string of combos(Usually 6 for each), a huge variance in movesets(Some use cannons, some jump high with drills to land in an explosion, whips, fans, claws...), so there is a huuuge variety. Not only that, but each moveset has...about 6 unique weapons to pick up?(In the latest one), and they can have various properties that affect what they do, like freezing enemies, leaving thunderbolts in your wake, or engulfing your weapon in fire. Aside from that, being a beat 'em up doesn't mean you just spam skills-There are various goals to accomplish in any given mission.

So, we'll get to those goals, but let's talk about the game modes. There's the story modes, for 4 of the Kingdoms, one for Lu Bu, and one for other minor characters. Each of them is fully fleshed out, and there's even a hypothetical route for each story detailing a sort of 'what if'. So, I mentioned goals-In each story mission, you get from 2-5 characters to pick from. Each character tends to have their own goals-IE in one mission, depending on the character you pick, you either have to defend a bridge, run into enemy lines to save a baby, or follow your leader and make sure he doesn't die. So it's not as simple as mashing buttons to win-You have to keep an eye on the field and make sure your side is doing ok. The hypothetical missions that I mentioned before, will test you on your knowledge of what will happen-If you save an important figure, then they show up in the succeeding missions, and change those missions accordingly. So replayability? A massive amount. That's not even getting into the leveling system, weapon collecting, pet collecting, what have you. There's ambition mode, a sort of 'Gotta catch all the generals', build facilities, get the emperor. There's a challenge mode, there's a free mode, and then there's XL missions for the PS4 version.

And then there's a the characters. There's easily over...80 playable characters? Many of them have intersecting paths, and while the voice acting can be cheesy at times, it's much, much better than before. Not only that, there is a huge variance of characters. I would say Dynasty Warriors is one of the few games that has a wide variety of different personalities-You have your "I wanna beat them all" characters, conniving characters, benevolent characters, and it has a plethora of female characters with very different personalities. There is some eye candy(For both males and females), however attention is never drawn to that unless the character boasts about it-From the beautiful male Zhang He, who must fight with beauty, to Sun Shangxiang who knows she can match her brothers in combat.

You asked why do people ask these games. Alot of reasons. I like a few of the characters massively because they're well written, and it's just a good time spent. Sure, I can turn off my brain, put it on an easy difficulty, and just hack and slash my way to victory. But that's only after I've done the stories and the hypotheticals. That's another thing I like about it, it's never light on content. The only DLC tends to be either cosmetic things, or levels from previous games, or weapon skins. But yeah, I hope you look into it. It's not for everyone, but if it clicks with you, then that's great!

@ronald: All very true, and people attacking those kind of relationships among devs and game journalists just do not know how journalism works, and aren't educated on the subject. It's that simple. People even attacked Patrick on Twitter because of an the quote of his about every story he has broken has been because of a relationship or friendship with a source. BUT THAT'S HOW JOURNALISM WORKS FOR FUCK'S SAKE! Jesus Christ this stuff has been depressing because people are just making shit up and finding problems and "corruption" where there aren't any. The spotlight has been on gaming journalism since Doritosgate and people have found jack shit, nothing. The "corruption in game journalism" had no leg to stand on from the Zoe Quinn stuff hit, and they have absolutely nothing now.

For some of the complaints of "games journalists should look into this and we would shut up" I can't help but think of a similar situation: "Yes, President Obama, all we need is the long form birth certificate to prove that you are an American citizen. Just prove it or else we will continue to call you Kenyan." Sometimes the issue isn't important enough to handle right now, because there is a bigger issue at hand. The White House eventually did release the long form birth certificate.

And it's not just these. Political reporters strike friendships with the press secretaries and press aides of politicians, because they talk all of the time and share similar interests, they're opposite sides of the same job. And what happens, those reporters tend to get warning ahead of time when something is going to happen.

People who write about movies will strike up friendships with people who make them, whether it be actors, directors, or whoever else. That's how a lot of them build sources. People eat up all of the new scoops on the next Star Wars but ignore the fact that most of those scoops are coming from friends working on the film calling up a friend to give them that information. And the movie studios court favor, offering trips overseas to watch the filming of what is usually a critical scene that will get these journalists excited. And when your friend gets to direct Fantastic Four, maybe you talk about him being a friend, maybe not. And how many film journalists get into that industry because they want to write screenplays, or direct? Just as many if not more than games journalists.

Wrestling operates the same way of building friendships. You build friendships with people and when they get to WWE they call you up to complain about something Vince McMahon is doing and tell you to post it. PWInsider's Mike Johnson and Paul London have even admitted that London was one of Johnson's sources in WWE because the two had become friends from when London was on the indie scene. Similarly, Mike Bucci who went to WWE as Simon Dean was friends with Johnson and Dave Scherer from his days in ECW and he has said he would call them to gossip about things the company was doing. Johnson has said that one of the reasons he tries to go to indie shows every weekends is to cultivate new sources.

If anyone wants to see how the music press handles itself just watch Almost Famous. They live with the bands and get to be very close friends with them. And maybe you share all of their dark secrets, or maybe you share some juicy secrets but leave a few out. I remember reading a Rolling Stone from about 15 years ago where a writer did a piece on Jewel and is talking about sticking to her like glue, even sleeping in the same bed in her hotel room.

What do all of these have in common with each other and with video games? The people on both sides of the journalism line from creator to journalist share the same passions. And when you have those passions it's easier to make friends with that person than with someone from a different passion. Because you have something in common and talk to them. The first time I met some online friends from a comic book site we stayed up all night talking X-Men. And late into the night I came to the realization that it was easy being friends because they had similar experiences to myself and we had something to talk about. And from that shared interest we are still friends over a decade later.

And when it comes to Giant Bomb part of what I love about the website is the friendship the guys have developed with developers. Having great guests who create games is part of the fun of Scoops and the Wolf. Having Brad Muir play the Whatever Dollar Amount Pyramid on a Quick Look was great. And the special E3 and GDC podcasts wouldn't be as special without the friendships. You would not have the openness of communication. Dave Lang wouldn't be Dave Lang if he wasn't comfortable around these guys.

So what makes games journalism different from every other form of journalism? And why is it that females seem to be getting the brunt of the target thrust on them? And most importantly, where were the crusaders demanding for fair and balanced reviews back in 2007 when a successful member of the gaming press was fired for giving a game a fair rating in a review?

Patrick, if you do end up watching Twin Peaks, don't feel obligated to watch every episode. It gets pretty bad a short way into Season 2.

When you started talking about Ryan some asshole ninjas started chopping onions by my desk, it was the worst. :/

@forkboy: I don't think it is at all. That's the kind of language being used to suppress that discussion. It's not the kind of language I'd ever resort to, I try to be a different kind of asshole than that. Think Harley Davidson and the Marlboro man.

I just think it's at best silly and at worst completely disingenuous. It's letting the worst people on the internet control what you feel comfortable talking about. I'm not comfortable giving them that much influence over how and what I think.

If you can't see why right now is a terrible time to have that discussion then you come across as a bit tone-deaf to be honest. Because the discussion was hijacked from the off by people with less than good intentions. Which yeah, that does suck for someone who has a sincere interest in the discussion (& it's to some extent an important topic, though frankly it's a dozen times less important than death & rape threats) but that doesn't mean that a reasonable human being shouldn't be able to understand why someone wouldn't think now is the time to talk about vidya game writer ethics. Because as much as you care about it, lots of people just want to use it as the latest stick to beat certain individuals with.

I'd have that discussion today with my friends or whatever, because I know & trust my friends & know they aren't going to use that topic disingenuously. People on the internet, less so. Too many people poisoned the well to give strangers the benefit of the doubt I'm afraid. If that is the equivalent of "giving into terrorists" in your eyes then eh. I don't really agree.

I would also like the sound as a podcast.

@patrickklepek: Of course. I guess I just don't see how talking about what is proper in regards to dev/publisher/press relations is something that should be taken as some kind of personal attack on anyone. It's not like I'm even interested in any specific examples of impropriety, just some kind of discussion about how close is too close, and what people feel should be announced openly.

I don't see any problem with, say, you wanting to support someone who makes games you're a fan of on patreon, but if you were to do so I'd like to think you'd have enough integrity to at least mention the fact if you reviewed a product from the person you directly support financially.

Can't find it again, but someone tweeted at Totilo a few days back basically saying "good job, now the terrorists win" because Totilo announced something to do with his writers and what they can or can't do with Patreon. That kind of thing is straight up idiotic, and completely counter to any kind of reasonable discussion of anything. Of course, it's twitter, so I shouldn't expect much, but still.

Hey @patrickklepek?

I'm a subscriber. Can you make this video publicly available?

I wouldn't mind, and I think it's important. If anybody else thinks this is worth keeping as premium content, by all means, don't do it, but if you want my permission, you got it. Go frickin' post it on 4chan if you have to. Just... get it out there.

I completely agree with you Patrick

Of course not! I even said, in the video above, people have some points--I even addressed a few. But in the broader context, we need to take a breath and figure out priorities. That priority should be the people being harassed. We need to show some empathy for lives that are being impacted over this.

@patrickklepek: But it's only ok to talk about it from one perspective and only coming to one conclusion, or you're a monster?

Thats a horrible analogy. It's problematic to talk about both of these topics at the same time because they're intertwined. One does not exist without the other. This isn't one problem happening on one side of the Internet, and another problem happening on the other side of the Internet. They co-exist.

@emuprime: Just tell them to become members ;)

In the 8th grade I woke up the morning we were taking school photos with something like that. Like a goddamn after school special or something. Except I didn't learn some big lesson at the end. Instead I faked like I was ill and stayed home and played Quake.

I hope I'm not "moderated" as I'm not speaking about any specific person (besides Patrick) or personal information.

To me Patrick's argument about why the cliquey-ness of game developers and games journalists is OK doesn't hold water. My paraphrasing of the argument: "What I'm doing is OK because ... Hey, look at what's going on over there! Isn't that so much more messed up than what's going on over here?" It resembles the argument I would have used as a kid in school if I was caught wearing an inappropriate shirt: "Hey, why are you mad at me? Look at what that guy over there is wearing, it's so much worse!"

Besides, the traditional answer to arguments about priority, such as "Why are we spending so much money/effort/attention on women in gaming when there are starving children in Africa/Millions of lives could benefit from an increase of funding in cancer research" has been that we can be worried about more than one issue at once. I don't see why the same doesn't apply here, I think we can be concerned about both the objectivity of games journalists AND the sources of funding for games journalism.

@kid_gloves: There's no discussion now. There are people upset about how some people are being treated on twitter, and there's the unwashed hordes rolling in talking about people's sex lives like a bunch of creeps. There's a lot of building of forts and shouting from them, but calling anything going on right now a discussion is fucking comical.

And if someone tries to start a reasonable discussion, leaving out the rabid redditors and unwashed 4chan masses they get told they're part of the problem and shouted down by the enlightened warriors of justice. The whole thing's a joke.

Funny thing is, I don't think any of the goings on is really a problem, I just think it's a good idea to be open about stuff. If youtubers have to tell you when they take money to make a video telling dick jokes over a game, maybe a "journalist" should be honest and let his or her readers know that they actively funded a game they reviewed. Seems more honest, is all. Of course, saying that makes me part of the problem, no better than all the anime avatar death threat guys, I guess.

@patrickklepek: I wouldn't worry too much about the pimple. Try getting a bigger, redder one, on the end of your nose... around Christmas time, and you were 15 at the time... yeaaaah, good times.

I didn't at any point do that. I offered advice to people. No one has to take it, I just think people who have alternative opinions on games etc. should work more on joining the discussion than attacking the discussion.

@kid_gloves: Don't use disgusting, hateful people as an excuse to dismiss entirely reasonable discussion?

If you aren't one of the people throwing harassment around and being horrible you shouldn't pick a time when that is the major topic to bring up ethical debates about journalistic integrity. If you wish to criticize the criticism and or ethics of the gaming press that is perfectly fine, but if you choose to do that after tons of personal harassment in the name of a similar cause and also don't want that associated? Don't choose that moment. There is no time limit and taking advantage of this moment will seem to everyone to be taking advantage of a really gross awful harassment to bring your point across. Do not boost off the back of hateful people.

I don't do movements. I've never used a hash tag. I'm not part of some internet thing to bring Honesty and Truth back to garme jurnalizm or whatever the fuck else. Those people freak me out as much as the Patricks of the world.

I'm just saying, there should be room for discussing something that clearly has a lot of fucking interest with people who follow games and games writing, and not just the creepy, evil ones at 4chan and reddit, but reasonably intelligent and reasonable people who think it's kinda weird that a journalist would think it's ok to directly fund an artist and then review said artist's products without mentioning the fact that they funded that person.

I don't think wanting to talk about that stuff makes you one with the kind of people who hound people on twitter, who threaten and abuse, and I think it's a real shame Patrick seems to think it does.

Or at least that the fact that some people are abusive, disgusting shitbags is a good reason to not discuss these things ever.

I find it really hard to cogently explain my views on this, and it always either ends long-winded & rambling or else very short & to the point but also more abrasive than I intend. I think there is a discussion to be had about video game media & ethics. But I also think it is a lot less important than the misogynistic & reactionary nature of a vocal minority of people who play games. The problem isn't "we can't talk about this or the terrorists win" exactly, but at the same time, you share a platform with these people then hey, you're going to be splattered with some of the copious quantities of shit they vomit forth. That's reality.

Create some movement or something to talk about game media ethics that doesn't come out of the "I hate Zoe Quinn because she is a vocal woman with opinions which makes me uncomfortable" crowd & people will be a lot more willing to have that debate. But right now, gamergate is clearly about more than just ethics, even if that is the only part that you personally (& many others) care about. You & your legitimate concerns have been co-opted by vile misogynists. That means that people are going to be unwilling to discuss with you until you move away from those people. Sorry about that, but just how it is.