GamerGate thread

[Kuya]

That's not how professional codes of ethics work, sorry. Any violation is a transgression against the profession and needs to be dealt with. If your doctor orders a surgery you don't need, his licensing board doesn't tell you to see someone else if you don't like his work. If we were talking about somebody like Reuters or the AP being paid off to cover stories with a certain bias, would you still be saying "just read somebody else"? If so then maybe you have a condescending opinion about gaming that sorta disqualifies you from this subject.

Instead of using examples of fields where a lot of objectivity is required, you should use an analogy like movie reviewers. Do you think movie reviewing is an objective field where values and subjectivity have little to do with the final score?

[Correction]

Colbert confirmed for fucktard.

http://a.pomf.se/ghekmj.gif

[Teryu]

I'm sure you wouldn't be donning your sword of "patriarchy's bane" or your shield of "stop raping women by saying hi to them" if he had railed her.

[Correction]

I'm sure you wouldn't be donning your sword of "patriarchy's bane" or your shield of "stop raping women by saying hi to them" if he had railed her.

Your tears are salty and delicious.



Your group hug awaits you at 8chan.

Video of Sarkeesian on Colbert is here if people actually want to see why Teryu's losing his shit.

[BaneTheBrawler]

i belong to no man

[Teryu]

Oh wait, Suey Park is freaking out about Anita getting on and claiming it's due to white women being so protected in society.

I sense a tiffy stirring in a couple that both wanted Colbert taken off the air.

[BaneTheBrawler]

colbert is already on the way out so i guess they win?

[Teryu]

Oh right I forgot that.

[Koul]

I thought the bit was pretty good. It wasn't really pro-GG nor was it anti-GG. anita did her usual deflect to misogyny. I also love the Suey Park tears.

[Xajii]

their bias is disclosed, all the opinionated shows are "editorial"

Every freaking review of anything ever is an " editorial" by default

[Mazmaz]

"What if there was no ethics in hollywood journalism" hahaha oh wow

That being said, it's not unfair to say that Anita is kind of a typical white feminist. Complaining about oppression in video games seems pretty privileged. Also, in that interview alone, she framed things as "women and men" which is pretty cisnormative. Of course I don't expect her to educate the public about all the genders of the rainbow on Colbert, so I'm generally ok with what she says.

[KetSC]

This is a long post but read it and realize that there's nothing wrong with video game websites. What is wrong is that everyone (even some independent youtube reviewer) simply copies the hype (or negative), joins a bandwagon (or be a hipster) and present opinions on a game that will most likely get them the most views (it doesn't matter if it's a big name website or some random person on youtube, almost everyone does this).

I seriously doubt game review sites are being paid that much (we know for a fact from the Gamespot and Kane and Lynch thing but that was one of the few ones). What I find interesting over the past years is that review sites have all kind of been similar (negative or positive).

Who would pay a bunch of people to post negative reviews? Competiton? I doubt it.

The reality is, they like to join the bandwagon and/or be hipsters. Reviewers likely read the hype off of forums or whatever (or twitter), then if the vast majority say they like the game, they give the game good reviews. If the vast majority say they hated it or are not looking forward to the game, they give it negative reviews.

Why would that do this?

The reality - People like other people with similar opinions to them. "And" people also generally like presenting opinions to others that they think will make them more liked.

Lets use Kripparian for example. He hates on Wildstar during the hype (almost everyone was saying Wildstar was the WoW killer, going to destroy every other MMOs, etc). Kripp gets a bajillion dislikes on his videos and he losses lots of subscriptions to his channel.

He got a ton of dislikes and loss subscriptions and viewer numbers just because he had a different opinion compared to his viewers (who stopped being a fans of him and thought otherwise after he presented his clearly wrong opinions about Wildstar).

So you see, it's actually a thing.

And this applies everywhere too. "I'm not going to visit IGN! They gave a game I liked a lower score!" Or "I'm not going to visit IGN! They gave a game I disliked a high score!".

So what video game reviewers (what "everyone" does, including random youtube reviewers) do is probably take a quick look at the popular forums or media sites (gamefaqs, reddit, twitter, youtube), see whether the majority of users (players) are hating on the game or not.

Kojima epic video game maker? Lets rate Metal Gear Ground Zeroes (a 5-30 minute game) a 10/10. Why? Fans are like - This game will be the best game ever! Therefore, review sites are like "We don't want to lose visitors, lets parrot those fans' opinions!".

Resident Evil 6 is made by Capcom! Everyone says Capcom sucks? We better copy their opinions! Lets give RE6 a 3/10! (Destructoid, I'm looking at you.)

(Even though I find RE6 to be a decent game. Destructoid are like the biggest hipsters when it comes to their reviews.)

It isn't video game journalism corruption. To be fair, reviewers aren't really journalist or anything. Just people saying what the masses want to hear about their favorite or not so favorite game (then hoping they get a tons of likes for appealing to their opinions).

Lets take Destructoid again for example.

3/10 Resident Evil 6.

9/10 Resident Evil 5 and Resident Evil 4.

9.5/10 Deus Ex Human Revolution.

Do you see a problem with those ratings?

Spoiler: show

Either they are going for a "Recommend or don't recommend" system (which they aren't because they are rating on a 10 point scale) or they are simply being hipsters of gaming reviews.

Deus Ex HR I know got a lot of hype on forums before the game was released. Hence giving a 9.5/10. Resident Evil 4 and Resident Evil 5 (both hyped by fans before release) also got 9/10 reviews from Destructoid.

Resident Evil 6 I know had a lot of hate from the game was released. Hence the low score (3/10). Now when comparing RE4 and RE5 to RE6, is RE6 that much worse than 4 and 5 that it loses 6 points? No, it's the classic "appeal to fans to get viewers" thing reviewers like to do. Whether it's negative or positive, people like it when others share their opinions pr bandwagons.

Here is my slightly lengthy analysis on the games Destructoid reviews and why I find their reviews (and other review sites and persons) to be doing the classic "appeal to the fans" rather than objectively reviewing the game category.

Spoiler: show

1. If Destructoid were giving harsh reviews, then Deus EX HR shouldn't have gotten an 9.5. Personally, I'd give Deus EX HR a 9/10 at most and only because I pick scores "9 and above" as scores that even if people aren't into that genre will probablhy enjoy playing.

However Deus EX HR had a lot of flaws and complaints (especially if you compared it to Deus Ex 1) from the way boss battles work and the fact that the exp gain isn't balanced at all (non-lethal runs give far more exp than lethal runs).

At most, it should be an 8.5. While the majority of people enjoyed the game, it is definitely not 9.5 material (especially compared to Deus Ex 1). Personally, a game should only be 9 or higher if you can't find easy things to fix (or easy things to balance). Deus Ex HR had many of those.

2. For Resident Evil 6. Destructoid are at it again. Appealing to the masses with their low score rating. RE6 did get a lot of complaints but it is definitely not a 3/10.

3. Resident Evil 5 and 4 reviews. RE5 got a 9/10 and RE4 also got a 9/10. RE6 is definitely not a 3/10 compared to those games.

What's the difference?

RE4 and RE5 have mass praises (while RE5 does get a lot of negativity from RE4 and especially from RE1-3 fans, the majority forum posters like on gamefaqs and stuff, hyped up the game and gave it positive reviews).

RE4 is what I call "Resident Knifer 4" as the majority of the game is going up some ladder or hiding behind a door, and knifing mobs to conserve ammo.

Yes, RE4 did a good job at making the enemies actually threatening but that is all.

The variety of weapons aren't great (the Mine Thrower was impractical to use due to the fact you could barely find ammo for it, despite it being a fun weapon).

The QTE and scenes are no worse than in RE6.

RE6 did a lot of neat things. First, the melee is a lot more fun in RE6.

It's certainly better than RE4. I like RE4 but for a lot of the game, it really is going behind some door or up some ladder and just knifing everything. It gets a bit boring.

However RE6 did it a lot better with its more varied melee combat.

Destructoids RE6 review was also over the top in bashing RE6's cutscenes and content too (when RE6's over the top cutscenes are both in RE4 and RE5).

The difference in 3/10 (RE6) and 9/10 (RE4 and RE5) reviews doesn't match up here in terms of objective analysis of the game. What was the major difference between those games is the fact that RE4 and RE5 had bunch of fan hype while RE6 had a lot of negativity hype. When RE6 was released, it was when Capcom was the cool company to hate on (between canceling Mega Man Legends 3, to on disc DLC, to DmC remakes, etc) so that's when the masses started to hate on Capcom.

And that's when sites (Destructoid is the biggest example) started to do what everyone (not just reviewers) do best, it is to bring out an "opinion" that appeals to the masses rather than be objective about it.

Again, presenting opinions that others find agreeable is the best way to get viewers. Know that and just don't take any reviewer (whether it's some person on Youtube or a website) seriously.

Lets be honest, it's not just video game sites. I've watched lots of youtube reviews on youtube too and it always feels like the majority of them just cater to the masses. They present opinions on games that are likely to be shared by the most people (to get the most viewers). Bonus points if they do it a little after it has been confirmed that the masses like or hate on a game.

Spoiler: show

Like if there is a game everyone is already hyped up about, some person will just make a review praising that game (or if it is already out already and many people gave them good reviews, join them!).

Same with negative reviews too.

There's nothing wrong with video game review sites by itself, what's wrong is taking those review sites or youtube reviewers without any extra research.

It's a problem that is going to stay here for a while.

As this thing to do on the internet these days (cater to the masses by copying everyone's opinion - Whether it is joining a hype bandwagon or being a hipster).

This Gamergate thing isn't going to change anything. It's not video game journalism corruption. It's everyone on the internet these days only presenting opinions on games that will get them the most viewers (pre hype stuff bonus or hipster bonus).

Gamergate wouldn't be a thing (or need to be a thing) at all if people knew to not take reviews without doing any research on their own.

Spoiler: show

Again, it's not even just "corruption", it's just a bunch of review sites or youtube people appealing to the masses (Any Metal Gear Solid game is 10/10, even if is only 5 minutes long, while if a major site like Capcom gets hated on, all their games get 3/10s - This is appealing to the bandwagons and hipsters of the internet, which everyone does including Youtube reviewers).

Plus now (more than ever) you can easily test or find out about games (don't need to read or watch only one reviewer) thanks to ease to user reviews, games, etc (I mean on Steam itself, you can watch videos, read forums, see user reviews, etc all in the client itself, so it's easily).

With video game journalism, nothing they do can't be done by a fan or something. Plus, the stuff people talk about (like "topics") are discussed in more depth on just random forums most of the time.

There are lots of fans who report on news day by day. Wasn't andriasang mostly a fan effort news site? Probably not a good example since they closed down but there are tons of fan stuff like that. If even all news site are down, there are still forums.

Also about the guy vs girl debates (that may not be the main focus of this gamergate but has been talked a lot about):

Honestly how is it different for a girl to want something different from a guy?

I've seen many male youtube LPer or whatever saying things like "my computer broke down - can I get some money to buy a new computer?" and people do give them money. And when girls do it, same thing and same result. It's no big deal either way. People really overreact to things and make a big deal out of nothing.

Again, I have never really taken reviews by just "one" gaming site or whatever seriously. With video games, movies, etc, it's so easy nowadays to find the opinions of hundreds or more on something you want to find out about. So again, this seems like a big deal over nothing.

This gamergate, I don't think it's a big deal.

You just go to youtube, forums, whatever and check out video games. Generally sometimes that doesn't work. Also you don't need LPers, there are lots of people that play a game without commentary either so you can just see the gameplay without any commentary giving any influences.

[Mazmaz]

Please don't disparage us hipsters like that sir, I resent that. I don't want to be compared to QuidProsJournos or whatever the fuck.

[archibaldcrane]

Nate Silver would call it "herding".

[Qalbert]

Hideki Kamiya and Adam Baldwin are fighting on twitter. lmao.
https://twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/527742493803036672

[Kuya]

Colbert interview of Anita:

http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/video...k_103014_cn_77

[Kuya]

Hideki Kamiya and Adam Baldwin are fighting on twitter. lmao.
https://twitter.com/PG_kamiya/status/527742493803036672

Crash and burn, baby

[Jefe]

Anita is the digital gonorrhea, just when you thought she was gone she shows up again.

[BaneTheBrawler]

so does that make the hoop earrings the jolly rancher?

[Priran]

couldn't name 3 games


friendly reminder that SJWs absolutely unquestionably play video games