OreoSpeedwagon

@rastemen: That's probably because boogie2988 isn't treating it like PG-13 chaturbate. Meanwhile, Kaceytron.

It's not exact a mystery what her logo's inspiration is.

RIP Kaceyton.

But seriously, all that crap seemed... Exploitative of lonely/nerdy teens who were buying stuff for these women on Twitch. Better off without it.

This is super exciting news. Hopefully, this is a sign that Sega MIGHT bring the Persona series over to PC also?

Did... Did you just make up your own sentences in an attempt to tell me what I said, instead of quoting me, while totally ignoring all the things I actually had to say?

I wonder why I feel like people aren't actually have good faith conversations about these things.

> If you would like to bring issues about gaming journalism to light, you and anyone else are still perfectly free to do so.

That's an absolute joke, and you know it. I have never used any "banner" before. I don't do twitter, I don't do hashtags. But if I try to bring up an issue like nepotism, people like you (I've seen your post history in this thread) will roll their eyes and go "Oh, it's one of you people." You do not strike me as wanting to have an honest conversation about those topics, because you have a single issue that dominates everything you want to talk about.

It's unfortunate the worst people possible are being used by the opposition to cast GamerGate this way, but it's to be expected. I have experienced this a good bit in my life, growing up a less privileged individual. I didn't get the opportunity to go to college because my parents from the working class -- when they were able to work at all -- and am now an lucky enough to be an electrician. I'm in my 9th year of the union, and these same anti-GG tactics are the same sort I see used against unions all the time. Provocateurs push, and since the union is really just a collection of folks, you're going to find someone who's less stable or will make a bad decision on a picket line -- or, are just an asshole looking for an excuse to do something violent/vandalize -- and the conversation becomes "Those union thugs!" instead of about working conditions or pay.

It's sad, but that's the kind of thing that works. I doubt this argument will get too much sympathy here either, because the anti-GG sort consider themselves liberal, but are also the type of liberal to look down at the working class. Discussions of "privilege" funnily enough rarely factor in socio-economic class... It's almost like these people who engage in that sort of debate tend to come from the upper-class and don't want to acknowledge they have the greatest privileges in America.

I feel like there's a perhaps insincere attempt to link what's clearly a lone sociopathic individual to the entire Gamers Gate group that is... An attempt to deflect a serious problem. It reminds me of the Occupy Wall Street movement of a few years back. It gained a lot of attention quickly, it was sprouting some real sense of a political force around it ... And that scared the conservatives out of their minds. So they went out to find the one in a thousand nutters and made them the face of the movement, made the discussion about those people and the "There was a rape in Zuccoti park! These animals need to be stopped, send in the cops!" Pretty soon, Occupy was villified and the side with the spin "won".

I kinda feel like we're dealing with that sort of thing with video games. And I guess it's a valid, if extremely dirty, way to win the P.R. battle. It won't change things though. This is going to come up again and again. Honestly, this feels like a continuation of the fight we had in video games 2 years ago "gamer entitlement", except now with a little extra venom by calling us sexists and racists. That probably isn't helping tempers. Not one bit.

Absolute nonsense. Creative people want to create. Would there be much less? Would it be less polished? Most definitely. If a person couldn't make a living from doing what they loved, they'd have less time to devote to it, but they would still do it. Plenty of people spend hundreds to thousands of hours with music, with absolutely no intent to profit from it. Similarly with art or silly videos and .gifs shared all over the internet.

Is it better that creators are able to make a living out of it? Definitely. But I absolutely do not buy that the ONLY way art or content is created is through capitalism. That sells people short.

An interesting look in to the thoughts of the mentally divergent. Good scoop.

Less snarky, this guy definitely isn't an economist. Unless you get a "bump", the majority of your sales will be in the opening weeks. After that, the demand drops off sharply. Look at Hollywood movies; the major portion of the take is opening weekend. After a while, to continue to gain revenue "bumps", theaters (Used to, at least) release a films to the drive-in, dollar discount theaters, etc. Then, they would have the film rights sold to HBO and other premium channels. Finally, they would release the film for a high MSRP, that would drop over time.

FOX isn't trying to demand that no one can ever see The Empire Strikes Back for less than the price of a movie ticket each viewing, because they realize that's incredibly stupid. They'd also slap you if you suggested "early viewers" on opening night should get some sort of discount.

The benefit to seeing a film early, or playing a game near release, is the cultural zeitgeist. People are excited to discuss it, there are things to discover that haven't been blown up on the internet, you have interesting stories to tell about your experience with the game.

@breadfan: Aside from Africa, Asia, North America, South America, Australia, the Pacific islands, yeah, they really dropped the ball by doing absolutely no work at all.