555 Comments
Posted by Fonzinator

Typed something, deleted it, retyped it, deleted it. Just going to say that I am so very glad that I have moved to a video focused, entertainment view on video game coverage. Parts of all of this shit from the past month bug me, but we can't talk about them so I won't. Looking forward to some more scares, BEAST office coverage, and the comments of fringe anonymous members of various internet groups to be forgotten. They help neither side and take away from my video game talk shows.

Posted by Undeadpool

@wolfgame said:

@undeadpool: can't find a single person in here that has said the death threats were appropriate. Completely disgraceful to imply that the users who have posted in here are advocating for that behavior. We are reading very different comment threads if the message you are taking away is that death threats and sexual assault are condoned.

I was gonna bring up an example or three I'd read but they, and MANY others, seem to have been deleted. Yeah, I know, it sounds like a cop-out, but I assure you, I've loved this site since it was a blog crawl and I wouldn't just make some crap up to disparage it.

So at this point: we're both right. We are, in fact, both reading VERY different comment threads. And I'm happy to see that apparently the mods/staff DON'T condone those things.

Online
Posted by geirr

Looking forward to seeing that video from the Chicago meet-up, @patrickklepek. I'm not even in the US (not even close) but I like seeing what geographically different 'fan groups' of the site do during gatherings.

Edited by dr_mantas
Edited by spraynardtatum

Fucking Goro is a fucking pre-order bonus? PUT HIM IN THE GAME!!!!!!!! IN THE ACTUAL GAME!!!! IT'S GORO!!!!!

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

Posted by SpideyOck

I'm not really sure what's happening... Tried to follow some of what happened regarding Zoe Quinn but... Got to be too much at some point. I'm incredibly thankful that it isn't my career to be (at times) embedded in the filth that surrounds 'gaming' as a culture. Keep at it Giant Bomb duders... All you can do in this situation is use it as a teaching point, and hope that some people reconsider their actions in the future.

Posted by TheAcidSkull

Fucking Goro is a fucking pre-order bonus? PUT HIM IN THE GAME!!!!!!!! IN THE ACTUAL GAME!!!! IT'S GORO!!!!!

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

Wait wait wait...I thought You get to play as Goro? ARE YOU TELLING ME HE ISN"T IN THE GAME EITHER WAYS?!

Posted by spraynardtatum

@spraynardtatum said:

Fucking Goro is a fucking pre-order bonus? PUT HIM IN THE GAME!!!!!!!! IN THE ACTUAL GAME!!!! IT'S GORO!!!!!

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

Wait wait wait...I thought You get to play as Goro? ARE YOU TELLING ME HE ISN"T IN THE GAME EITHER WAYS?!

Goro is a staple, not a damn pre-order bonus.

Posted by TheAcidSkull

@theacidskull said:

@spraynardtatum said:

Fucking Goro is a fucking pre-order bonus? PUT HIM IN THE GAME!!!!!!!! IN THE ACTUAL GAME!!!! IT'S GORO!!!!!

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

Wait wait wait...I thought You get to play as Goro? ARE YOU TELLING ME HE ISN"T IN THE GAME EITHER WAYS?!

Goro is a staple, not a damn pre-order bonus.

I KNOW! But I got the impression that he would be part of the game and story even without the bonus! I just thought that by pre-ordering I'd get to fucking play as him.

Posted by spraynardtatum

@spraynardtatum said:

@theacidskull said:

@spraynardtatum said:

Fucking Goro is a fucking pre-order bonus? PUT HIM IN THE GAME!!!!!!!! IN THE ACTUAL GAME!!!! IT'S GORO!!!!!

Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb.

Wait wait wait...I thought You get to play as Goro? ARE YOU TELLING ME HE ISN"T IN THE GAME EITHER WAYS?!

Goro is a staple, not a damn pre-order bonus.

I KNOW! But I got the impression that he would be part of the game and story even without the bonus! I just thought that by pre-ordering I'd get to fucking play as him.

Playing as him is the whole point!

I COULD CURSE THE SKY!

Posted by drockus

Can anyone just give those of us who don't mess with twitter a clear and concise recap of what the hell they were talking about (harassment? etc.) for so long. The strange cryptic tone in the this broadcast seemed really unnecessary.

Edited by Devil240Z

@drockus said:

Can anyone just give those of us who don't mess with twitter a clear and concise recap of what the hell they were talking about (harassment? etc.) for so long. The strange cryptic tone in the this broadcast seemed really unnecessary.

I 100% agree. I am on twitter and I still get confused.

Also Medium is a a really generic word so I cant find that article Alex mentioned.

Edited by Devil240Z

@patrickklepek said:

@r3d_zombie said:

had no idea what they were talking about for the first half, good show otherwise.

I want to be you.

I feel like alot of us are just normal people not even seeing this crazy hate unless its being talked about by you guys.

Also someone responded to me here but I cant find their post. maybe they got modded for trying to help me understand the situation? Or maybe he was just posting garbage. probably that...

Posted by Jonny_Anonymous

MOTHER FUCKER!

Posted by TheAcidSkull

@spraynardtatum: I'll probably pre order now, I f*cking want to play as goro really badly!

Posted by patrickklepek

@drockus said:

Can anyone just give those of us who don't mess with twitter a clear and concise recap of what the hell they were talking about (harassment? etc.) for so long. The strange cryptic tone in the this broadcast seemed really unnecessary.

I haven't read this entire article, but Vox appears to have a pretty good summary.

Staff
Posted by patrickklepek

@draxyle said:
@rekatil said:

As someone who also is basically out of the loop from all of the events, it was kind of frustrating with them being so vague on the issue. From what I read, this is one of the biggest gaming stories in awhile and as a gaming journalism website (the best in my opinion) it would seem like they should be covering it at least a little.

The fact that Patrick and Alex danced around the issue was just mildly irritating is all.

Otherwise, Keep up the good work!

I can imagine it's difficult to cover, because the core of this "movement" goes back to a group of people going out of their way to destroy ZoE Quinn's and her friend's lives over an incorrectly perceived threat to game journalism. It's a lot of TMZ-level stuff that goes far beyond this site.

There is a debate to be had for integrity in the industry, but the only reason the current one exists is because these bullies and terrorists (there's no better word for what these people are) on various social media sites are looking for targets to destroy for any reason they can find.

Jeff already had to put out a statement last month that harassment from the community is unacceptable under any circumstances, so I'm not sure what they would put on the front of the site that would be much different now.

Yeah, you've basically nailed my thought process on this, especially as it relates to the "news" angle. Though there are bits and pieces that seem potentially worth addressing, but doing so, in a way, validates how this all started: a massive invasion of personal privacy masquerading as outing games journalism. I have zero interest in being party to that.

Staff
Edited by drockus

@drockus said:

Can anyone just give those of us who don't mess with twitter a clear and concise recap of what the hell they were talking about (harassment? etc.) for so long. The strange cryptic tone in the this broadcast seemed really unnecessary.

I haven't read this entire article, but Vox appears to have a pretty good summary.

Interesting article. Thanks. It's a strange world out there.

Edited by patrickklepek

Oh, buddy. My responses are in bold.

@deadhalf said:

I think if the mainstream video game media had higher standards for the sort of people they choose to promote, there wouldn't be so much backlash at those people from the dregs. When a particular person is featured on a website in a video chastising "internet jerks" for posting unkind things online, and that person is accused of doing something which is deeply hurtful and selfish to other people in their personal life, and that website refuses to make a statement about it, and in fact censors all discussion of the person in question, I think it can only really be expected that people won't be very happy. I think that when this person has been featured multiple times on this website within the span of a year, and when a major contributor to the website has this person's name listed in a section labeled "mad respect" on his personal website, and when the accusation directed at this person is of personal and professional impropriety, I think that there is sufficient personal connection between at least this particular website and this person that certain details of their personal life ARE in fact of concern to the readership.

Can you explain what those standards would be? At Giant Bomb, our standards are interesting people, that's about it. We try to engage and enlighten our audience. I'd be interested in what your definition of "unkind things" is, too, considering "unkind things" often means regular use of personal slurs and an assortment of other "unkind things." that are, in reality, harassment. But, hey, please continue your victim blaming.

Perhaps if the mainstream video game media had a modicum of respect for the reality that not all of their readership shared the same social views, and either abstain from promoting or being seen as promoting those whose views might be seen as radical, or at the very least offering some kind of alternative viewpoints on these issues, instead of marginalizing those with even moderately conservative views, some of these marginalized individuals wouldn't feel the need to resort to extreme tactics to make their dissatisfaction known.

When people say "some kind of alternative viewpoint," what they tend to mean is "I disagree with what you're saying, please share something that agrees with me." Your final statement implies the harassment is okay because it's the only way to make a point heard. If that's your only way to make a point heard, maybe you should start considering why it's not being heard. Please try to phrase your answer in a way that doesn't begin with an Internet-wide conspiracy theory. Plus, I'm not sympathetic to any cause/argument that would try to peddle the disclosure of home addresses and spamming of nude photos as merely "extreme tactics to make their dissatisfaction known." Good grief.

I do not condone the harassment campaign that has taken place over the past week, and I did not make a single contribution to the discussion before this post, but I understand why people are acting the way they are. They're sick of the partisan self-righteousness that has become more and more conventional in the mainstream video game media. They're sick of having no voice, and of having their even-tempered responses ignored or blown off by wannabe political journalists. Since moderate calm has failed them, what else do you expect but radical aggression?

"I do not condone the harassment campaign" is where you should have ended that sentence. It's the way you come across as a human being who cares about other people.

YOU are the source of it. YOU created these people. The least you could do is accept some of the responsibility for the toxic culture you've helped build, instead of just acting snarky or indignant towards it. And yes, this is to be addressed NOW, not after months of villainizing and wound-licking. That's what you do every time this happens, and where has it gotten us?

I'm sorry to inform you that it appears YOU are one of these people, as well. You may not be going out and actively harassing anyone, but "understanding" why people are doing it is the plainest example of victim blaming that I can come up with. This entire post has consisted of wonderful dance of logic to try and distance yourself from something you appear to support at every turn. At least be honest with yourself about it.

Staff
Posted by Kasaioni

I still don't know what the etymology of "Gamer Gate" is.

Edited by dr_mantas

There's plenty of harassment on both sides. Also belief that the side they are on is righteous, while the other is the devil. Bathing in a feeling of superiority.

If only it was ever clear cut.

Posted by patrickklepek
Staff
Posted by cyberfunk

Its simple: If you really care about the problems with "ethics in games journalism", help get rid of the harrsment campaign that is detracting from the message you want to get out. If this is really what concerns you, others are mudding up the message and making you all look like jerks.

Edited by TDot
Posted by patrickklepek

There's plenty of harassment on both sides. Also belief that the side they are on is righteous, while the other is the devil. Bathing in a feeling of superiority.

If only it was ever clear cut.

I would say the level of harassment is absolutely more one-sided.

Staff
Posted by FinalDasa

Its simple: If you really care about the problems with "ethics in games journalism", help get rid of the harrsment campaign that is detracting from the message you want to get out. If this is really what concerns you, others are mudding up the message and making you all look like jerks.

That's what I don't get. There are real issues and concerns that need to be discussed. Yet those who do have real points to be made are on forums and sites where the harassment and attacks are being coordinated or encouraged or ignored. How can you argue for legitimacy while the person next to you hurls attacks and slurs?

Moderator
Posted by Dilkington
Posted by Kasaioni
Posted by dr_mantas
Posted by BoneChompski
Posted by patrickklepek
Staff
Edited by The_Reflection

Can I still hate Kotaku for being a bunch of click-bait bullshit without being labeled a Misogynist? That's all I really want.

Posted by GioVANNI

Its simple: If you really care about the problems with "ethics in games journalism", help get rid of the harrsment campaign that is detracting from the message you want to get out. If this is really what concerns you, others are mudding up the message and making you all look like jerks.

For what it's worth, most people in the 4chan threads are decrying the harassment shit (like you said, it just muddies the water). It's hard to get rid of the people harassing when they're totally disconnected and are probably just trying to get a rise out of everyone.

Posted by DavidMerrick

@the_reflection: If all you really want is to hate on a specific website, like, aren't there better things to want in life?

Edited by cyberfunk

#Gamerghazi would have been much a better name IMO

Posted by DefaultProphet

@wolfgame said:

@rockyraccoon37 said:

Either way, I don't care about any of them. I do care about voices being oppressed, people being intimidated and threatened and critical thought being curtailed by anti-intellectuals.

Oppression is fine as long as it is against those who share a different view than you I guess.

I see a whole lot of people that want to "talk" about making the gaming environment a better place, a whole lot of people that want a conversation to be had, but they can't seem to fathom that in ANY movement that conversation may come under fire from the lowest rung of the internet ladder. At that point we have many choices on how to proceed, so far we cower into a corner only to reemerge at the next controversy saying "This is a discussion that needs to be had." Only to repeat the process on a loop. I am only getting so involved in this lately because it's disturbing to see so many people who want to be congratulated for raising issues they evacuate at the first available chance. When the going gets tough it's time to throw the community to the wolves.

The crux of this movement is that the gaming community is complacent in behavior that it is inappropriate, that couldn't be further from the truth. The gaming community will continue supporting everyones right to play video games, they don't shy away from tough topics and they will condemn those who seek to disrupt a dialogue, this plays out day after day. The narrative focus of lone heroes standing against an army of misogynist gamers is fiction. It may break barriers and make certain people feel less special but I am strongly inclined to believe that given the chance gamers would prove they care about these issues and want to see progress made. Can that be done while a persistent effort is made to catalog them with the smaller evil of the internet? Absolutely not. It's painfully clear why this conversation has stalled, but if this just a vehicle to "play pretend" on social issues at least recognize what impact this has on all people when you suddenly decide you can't be bothered to participate anymore.

Oppression is absolutely fine when it's directed towards people who only seek to oppress critical thought, progress, equality and inclusiveness. A dialogue can not be had with a person or group of people who reject the notion that the problem even exists. Those people must be shamed, ostracized and left behind to shout impotently at their loss of a homogeneous group in a culture that has predominately catered solely to them. And I'm not speaking solely to people in that group who are clearly misogynist and racist (of which there are enough that should make any person question the movement as a whole) but more specifically to those who claim they want equality, but only within their terms. Those liberals who are for equality, but don't want people in oppressed groups to be loud or angry or voice their criticisms in specific forms, ultimately requiring a form of assimilation in order to allow for equality.

"You can do and make whatever you want, so long as it makes us comfortable and fits within our terms of what is objective, what is journalism and what is criticism".

Gamergate, at every level of it's confused messaging is at it's core about only one thing: white, male men who identify themselves with a commodified product, are hurt and scared that they will lose control of a culture that has almost always catered only to them. In retaliation to that, we have extremists who are doxxing, threatening, and publicly shaming women in the industry and the men who stand at their side. We have Alex Jones conspiracy theory nuts who deny that any wrongdoing is occurring and if it is then it is entirely self-inflicted and part of some false flag campaign. And then we have the seemingly nice, calm liberal voices who don't agree with those crazies but ultimately still want to control the narrative of progress and are damning themselves (thankfully) by holding onto the gamergate name whose foundation is rotten to the core.

If you have questions about the relationship between the press and the industry, then fine (not really, it's dumb but whatever), but for your own sake don't associate it with this movement in any way. And don't attempt to suggest that the conversation must occur now, because it highlights your utter lack of empathy and reinforces the fact that you (consciously or subconsciously) want to divert attention away from real people who are being forced out of their homes and out of the industry because they have articulated thoughts that upset the status quo.

Shots. Fired.

I want to buy you a beer

Posted by patrickklepek

#Gamerghazi would have been much a better name IMO

Yessssssss.

Staff
Posted by quikblink

Hi Patrick,

Thank you for doing this. My question is simple. How is someone supposed to legitimately criticize a writer or outlet? I feel scared to say anything on twitter or in comments without being labeled a troll and having my opinion push aside. I'm not talking about idiotic criticisms like SJW or moneyhat garbage. For instance, if I feel that an outlet or reviewer is inconsistent with the site's review rubric how am I supposed to voice my opinion without being labeled a "fanboy" or "troll" and have my opinion pushed aside or belittled? It feels like only the extreme crazies ever get any attention, while legitimate criticism is ignored or disparaged.

Thanks.

Posted by WesleyWyndam
Posted by jelyk

This stuff is to gaming what Obama's birth certificate and the "new world order" is to politics.

Posted by TDot

@rekatil said:

As someone who also is basically out of the loop from all of the events, it was kind of frustrating with them being so vague on the issue. From what I read, this is one of the biggest gaming stories in awhile and as a gaming journalism website (the best in my opinion) it would seem like they should be covering it at least a little.

The fact that Patrick and Alex danced around the issue was just mildly irritating is all.

Otherwise, Keep up the good work!

It's because it involved the personal life of someone who has already had her life ripped open. It's not worth their discussion.

Edited by cthomer5000

The whole situation is a nightmare - it's basically just a bunch of scumbags out to ruin people. The fact that they are connected to gaming is probably irrelevant to them. The fact that any sort of "movement" is attached to is just something they are using to hide within to justify their actions.

That being said - I will criticize the way @patrickklepek and @alex have handled this. If you don't want to talk about it on the site - don't. Beating around the bush for 20 minutes makes for terrible listening/viewing. If you want to just leave it to your twitter and tumblr and consider it a personal issue then go for it. If you want to talk or write about it here - please bring it on. But half-stepping does a disservice to both the issue and your audience.

Edited by patbaer

Some gamers want Zoe Quinn and Maya Kramer and Jenn Frank and Anita Sarkeesian and Phil Fish to stop making games, to stop writing about games and being critical of games. They treat those writer and devs as outsiders trying to take away their games, to ruin the industry. They see asking for diversity or making "not games" as an attack. Friends of mine have been harassed, threatened, and made to feel unsafe in public and private. Their home addresses have been given out to the masses, all with the end goal of forcing them out of the industry.

For simply having one of these people on my panel at PAX, my youtube account was flagged (since fixed) and numerous attempts have been made to access my email.

If gamers here feel like there IS corruption in games media and things need to change, I would humbly suggest using #gameethics to distance yourself from garbage people. Here's a fun link of some 4channers in IRC: https://storify.com/strictmachine/gameovergate These are the people who are behind Quinngate and Gamergate. Consider your company.

Final note: we lost Jenn Frank, and we're worse off now that we were a week ago.

Edited by Kasaioni

@bonechompski Ok yes, this is what I meant by "etymology". I understand what issues are being discussed, but wasn't sure why the word "gate" was being used. But I get it now.

Posted by colesl4w

To me it honestly seems like GamerGate is seeking to remove all personality from games writing, which is really a bummer. Personality is why I love Giantbomb and the folks they have on their shows so much. If they were all trying to dance around and have "objective" opinions about things, nothing interesting would happen. Sites would just be Reviews and press releases.

Edited by Atwa

Is there a problem with you guys hanging out, making friends and hanging out with game developers when a lot of your work directly is meant to influence readers purchasing decisions. I am not saying that you can't make friends with game developers, it often makes for great content. But then I hear glowing talk about their products, which sometimes can be justified, it just kinda makes me wonder. There has to be a certain bias when talking about products that good friends of yours create?

Does games journalism need more disclosure to inform your audience of the strong relationships a lot of media and game developers have?

Edited by TDot

@quikblink said:

Hi Patrick,

Thank you for doing this. My question is simple. How is someone supposed to legitimately criticize a writer or outlet? I feel scared to say anything on twitter or in comments without being labeled a troll and having my opinion push aside. I'm not talking about idiotic criticisms like SJW or moneyhat garbage. For instance, if I feel that an outlet or reviewer is inconsistent with the site's review rubric how am I supposed to voice my opinion without being labeled a "fanboy" or "troll" and have my opinion pushed aside or belittled? It feels like only the extreme crazies ever get any attention, while legitimate criticism is ignored or disparaged.

Thanks.

Not speaking for Patrick here but as someone who has been a writer the best critiques are about specifics. Be specific and don't equate someone to belong to a group. At worst you'll be strawmanning and at best you'll make those people defensive. Even if they are being racist, don't call them a racist. The only response you'll get is "i'm not a racist."

Pick specific things from the article or series of articles and make a case for your argument, show hypocrisy with specific examples. Avoid broad generalizations and don't come off like you've been personally offended and don't insult.

EDIT: Never accuse someone of bias or having an agenda. This is shortcut to undermining your argument and making sure no one takes you seriously. They're meaningless and lazy arguments.