@Pixiejenni wants to know more about #gamergate.
To this end, she created a list of questions, asking us to e-mail the answers.
I started to answer, but then I got to the end:
(quotes of jenni are in italics, my answers are non-italics.)
This article will not go live whilst the #GamerGate tag is fully active – I think it’s too sensitive and delicate a topic to do so. I will also be being more strict about any potential identifying details. All contributors will be automatically anon.
I will post my answers publically instead. I think that's important to talk about #gamergate while it's topical, not an academic examination after the fact.
Journalist Mailing List
1. Tell me your thoughts on this development (though maybe aim for less than 500 words so I can fit it all in!)
That there's game development marketers on the list isn't all that interesting to me. It may be the most important part legally, but game journalism has always been deeply linked with game development, counting on them both for early access and advertising.
The escapist used non-game adverts for a while, when they started. It didn't last long.
The journalist mailing list and some of the revealed discussions taking place show how a few industry insiders like Ben Kuchera throw their weight around in an attempt to both influence what others write about and even how they moderate their forums.
This is very troubling.
When people are suggesting that they should consider the ethical implications of something, they're shouted down.
This is more troubling.
The mailing list shows how connected some people are and how a few people can cause many websites to censor discussion. Reddit. 4chan. This is an insane amount of discourse being blocked.
This is very deeply troubling and is what got me to take action regarding gamergate.
SJWs + Corruption
1. Define what you mean by SJW (Social Justice Warrior).
I don't care. I have not heard a meaningful definition, so I don't regard anyone SJW unless they self-identify as such and then I use the definition they give me.
2. Do you agree with this statement: “Being Anti-Corruption and Anti-SJW are hand in hand.” If so, why? If not, why not?
Unimportant. If you want an answer to that, please define SJW for me so I can say something meaningful about it.
What would a post-#GamerGate games website look like to you?
1. What categories of content would you like to see? (ie, news, reviews, op-eds, etc.)
No broadstrokes attacks on gamers.
Apologies for mistakes and attacks made.
Demonstrable effort to regain gamer goodwill.
There's room for news, reviews, op-eds, previews, convention reports, videos, the works.
I can't predict what I want, so it's up to them to keep doing what they do or experiment.To this end, she created a list of questions, asking us to e-mail the answers.
I started to answer, but then I got to the end:
(quotes of jenni are in italics, my answers are non-italics.)
This article will not go live whilst the #GamerGate tag is fully active – I think it’s too sensitive and delicate a topic to do so. I will also be being more strict about any potential identifying details. All contributors will be automatically anon.
I will post my answers publically instead. I think that's important to talk about #gamergate while it's topical, not an academic examination after the fact.
Journalist Mailing List
1. Tell me your thoughts on this development (though maybe aim for less than 500 words so I can fit it all in!)
That there's game development marketers on the list isn't all that interesting to me. It may be the most important part legally, but game journalism has always been deeply linked with game development, counting on them both for early access and advertising.
The escapist used non-game adverts for a while, when they started. It didn't last long.
The journalist mailing list and some of the revealed discussions taking place show how a few industry insiders like Ben Kuchera throw their weight around in an attempt to both influence what others write about and even how they moderate their forums.
This is very troubling.
When people are suggesting that they should consider the ethical implications of something, they're shouted down.
This is more troubling.
The mailing list shows how connected some people are and how a few people can cause many websites to censor discussion. Reddit. 4chan. This is an insane amount of discourse being blocked.
This is very deeply troubling and is what got me to take action regarding gamergate.
SJWs + Corruption
1. Define what you mean by SJW (Social Justice Warrior).
I don't care. I have not heard a meaningful definition, so I don't regard anyone SJW unless they self-identify as such and then I use the definition they give me.
2. Do you agree with this statement: “Being Anti-Corruption and Anti-SJW are hand in hand.” If so, why? If not, why not?
Unimportant. If you want an answer to that, please define SJW for me so I can say something meaningful about it.
What would a post-#GamerGate games website look like to you?
1. What categories of content would you like to see? (ie, news, reviews, op-eds, etc.)
No broadstrokes attacks on gamers.
Apologies for mistakes and attacks made.
Demonstrable effort to regain gamer goodwill.
There's room for news, reviews, op-eds, previews, convention reports, videos, the works.
2. What sort of games would you like to see focus on, and which would
you not like to see featured? (ie, early access or not, etc)
Any. All. Everything.
I've seen some people hate on avant-garde indie games, but they have their place.
I tend to enjoy a lot of them.
I wish they were covered on merit and not connections, but there's no way you can achieve that, any attempt to do so will fail and produce more injustice than it solves.
Any. All. Everything.
I've seen some people hate on avant-garde indie games, but they have their place.
I tend to enjoy a lot of them.
I wish they were covered on merit and not connections, but there's no way you can achieve that, any attempt to do so will fail and produce more injustice than it solves.
3. What sort of areas would you want to covered as ‘news’? (ie, game date releases, studio shutdowns, etc)
Anything you'd think that would be interesting to gamers. So that includes something like gamergate, higgs boson research findings, jack thompson (when he was relevant), research regarding natural play and games of children.
I do like seeing rather wide news. I like to be exposed to new things.
4. What sort of comment policies would you want them to have?
Anything goes as long as it isn't a direct personal attack, advertising or criminal.
5. List three things you’d want to see in an ethics statement from them?
1. I want them to acknowledge that the three important parties for them are 1. gamers 2. game developers 3. themselves (game journalist/media), with none being more important than the others.
2. An honest attempt to stay unbiased and accountable.
3. I think this paragraph on the escapist ethics policy covers the most important things:
- Before writing about allegations, use best efforts to secure more than one source. The source could be original screenshots we've taken of the posts in question, or gathered from reputable websites or newspapers, or other reasonable sources.
- When writing about allegations, we will use language that does not assume the alleged actions have taken place. We will use phrases like "The accused allegedly" or "So-and-so claims that" when describing the events.
- If staff members write personal opinions in a news post or in a forum thread, we will clearly identify them as the opinions of the writer and not as fact.
What is a “gamer” to you?
1. What, in your opinion, makes a gamer a gamer?
Someone who plays games and puts value into that activity.
Some people game and they don't value it. They don't self-identify as gamers, they're not gamers.
Some people game and they value it. They self-identify as gamers, they're gamers.
I think it works reasonably well to let people decide for themselves if they are or aren't gamers.
2. Do you think gamers should care about social/political content in games, or just whether they’re fun/enjoyable at all?
I don't think they should. I don't think they shouldn't either. It's up to both developers and players to have social or political content in games. Some of my favorite games have a deep political or social content, like "Hidden Agenda" and "Super Columbine Massacre RPG".
Although I take issue with people telling other people what to make or not make. That's a form of censorship/agenda that's at the root of the current problems causing people to stand up for gamergate.
Since gamedev and gamejourno's depend on each other, if gamejourno's collectively blackball a production and not report on it, that's not quite, but almost a death sentence of the game's bottom line.
3. Do you think “gamer” is equivalent to “movie-watcher” or does it mean something more/different?
No, it's more akin to "movie-enthusiast".
GamerGate + You
1. Why did you personally get involved with the #GamerGate tag?
I was banned for asking "Why exactly are people banned for talking about gamergate?"
2. What do you think the major goal of #GamerGate is?
I don't want to speculate on other people's goals, but I think the root causes are censorship, perceived corruption and a hostile attitude towards the customers.
3. Is this your main goal, or do you have something else you’d like to see addressed too?
My main goal is to get the discussion going and to have information surface. The sheer dismission and personal attacks that you get for supporting #gamergate are infuriating.
The hostile environment was created by a group of people including ben kuchera, leigh alexander, and kyle orland.
I don't like giving them the attention, but also yes, zoey quinn and anita sarkeesian.
When you only choose to engage and show your weakest critics (trolls/personal attacks) and don't engage with the more substantiated criticism you receive and silence it at every opportunity, you're actively contributing to a toxic environment.
4. How do you feel about the negative things that have happened attached to this tag? Do you think they take away from it, or that they’re separate?
They don't take away from it anymore than the harassment of pro #gamergate people proving something against anti gamergate. If you don't have proof who exactly did it, it is meaningless information and may have been done with an agenda you can't at that time comprehend.
(see fake emma watson nude leak threat)
5. Are there any things #GamerGate seems to be addressing that you disagree with?
Feminism itself is not the problem, although certain strands of radical and sex negative feminism heavily contribute to the problem. It seems like many in #gamergate aren't very knowledgable about feminism.
But then, many of us are typically not very political, so we're learning as we go.
Asking for feminism to be called equalism is as silly as asking for gamergate to be called gamerethics. Redefining names doesn't really help.
People on both sides tend to not be very good listeners.
Although so far, #gamergate supporters tend to do more research and be more honestly and openly critical of their allies, so that helps somewhat.
6. Are there any things #GamerGate is ignoring that you want it to talk about?
No, because nothing would stop me from talking about it with #gamergate
I do wish I could talk about it at more places than just twitter and with more people that are opposed to it.
Objective Game Reviews
Lots of you are asking for “objective game reviews”, but I’ve had a lot of different voices give me different answers on what they mean by this. So.
1. When you say “objective game reviews”, what do you mean?
No such thing as an objective review, because games are played for the purpose of subjective fun. You're supposed to make an honest attempt at objectivity. though.
It doesn't take a scientist to understand that a game journalist that's also the judge and also financially invested in the game, might not judge very objectively or write a very objective review.
2. Do you think reviewers with very obvious biases against certain genres – ie, like Yahtzee + MMOs – have a role in game reviews?
Yes, especially if they wear their biases on their sleeve and let you know. Yahtzee cares a lot about story and atmosphere and is not impressed by games that rely on other players to make them fun. I add this information to my lens when I read/watch his work.
This question+answer sounds like it might legitimize some of the people that write very loaded reviews, but it does not; it's the introspection added that makes a huge difference.
e.g.: "You must be an asshole if you like this game for it's patriarchal implications" is different from "playing farmville is all the hard work of farming without any of the rewards. If you are playing this, I'd like to ask, are you an idiot?"
One is elevating something inside a game to have social implications and is focusing on the value of the game for society.
The other is attempting to make a joke for entertainment purposes.
The difference may seem small, but it is a chasm of difference.
3. Can you give me an example of what you consider to be an “objective game review”?
As I said, no such thing.
4. Do you think that this is a neutral/objective statement about a piece of media, or an example of bias and opinion? Explain why please – I want to understand what you mean by what you say clearly, and this seems a good way to do so.
“The most novel thing about [this piece of media] is how lumpy, labored and relentlessly episodic its narrative is.”
Well, see my answers to 3 and 2.
5. What would you like to see covered in a review ie gameplay, mechanics, story, music, fun, narrative, etc.
All these things, but also the amount of money (or other favors) that changed hands either through adverts or directly for increasing the review score. Not holding my breath on this one :p
6. What do you think the difference between an op-ed and a review is (if any?)
It's not a disctinction that interests me very much.
Game Reviews and Pushing Agendas
1. What do you count as “pushing an agenda”? Can you give me an example?
I think it's hard to nail this down, because it's one of those things once you define it, people find a way to push an agenda without adhering to your definition.
The key here is that hopefully the only agenda someone has when writing game reviews is to give people an informed opinion of whether they'll enjoy the game.
A secondary or even primary goal might be to entertain.
Other people might prefer agenda-driven reviews. I know there are christian review sites that help christians choose games that are appropriate with their religion. There's no problem with this.
Just tell us on the label if you do adhere an agenda.
There has been a growth of agenda-pushing reviews without labels the last couple of years.
2. Do you think there are any “agendas” that are okay to push in game reviews, or not at all?
See 1: it's okay as long as it's labelled.
3. Do you have an issue with any of these three things, and if so (or if not), why?
- “I think this game has poorly designed female body types and it’s
somewhat sexist in how it portrays them” -> Game changes body typesI think the reverse happened in WoW. I wasn't a fan.
On the other hand I remember my 15-year old self writing a forum post on a beta game saying that the women should be slighty slimmer around the waist because it would look good.
I think a lot of people, both men and women have opinions on how they want women to look (in games as well as real-life). Not just our culture, but also biology makes the looks of women important.
The only part I take issue with is "it's somewhat sexist", because poorly designed body types can not be sexist in themselves and it's claiming a social issue when really I don't think it is. - “I think this game has poorly designed weaponry and I find it very boring and unintuitive” -> Game changes weapons
Yes, this is arguing for the sake of the quality of the game.
- “I think this game has made poor choices in promoting actual weapons and linking to arm manufactures in doing so and it’s glorifying war by doing this” -> Game changes weaponsGames have no responsibility for this. Whether something 'glorifies war' happens as much in the eye of the beholder as a body type being 'sexist'.
The Academic ‘Conspiracy’
1. What are your problems with the supposed academic conspiracy (the whole DiGRA thing)?
There is not enough information released publically at the current time to prove this, but there are some troubling signs.
2. Do you think that this discussion was exceptional in terms of academic niches, or fairly standard?
"The discussion" referring to discussions taking place at digra?
I've not seen, heard or read these discussions apart from a few glimpses and will not comment until I know more.
3. What concerns you most about potential academic links?
That the problem might be more institutional than previously thought.
4. Anything else you would like to add on this?
What is digra hiding? If you're academics, why not come forward as a group and show us what you've been talking about?
Why not engage in conversation, education etc.?
Bonus Article
1. Is there anything you would like to say that doesn’t fit any of the above questions?
The source of #gamergate being a thing is that many online havens of free speech are not allowing even moderate discussion of it.
Why would some people go through the extraordinary effort to censor so many of these discussions?
I assume that anti-gamergate people might argue that it's fear of harassment that's preventing this.
(note the only text I've removed are the questions for anti-gamergate people.)
So that's it.
I would love for anyone to e-mail me their answers and I'll post them here.
Also feel free to scrutinize and criticise the answers that I've given. I would love for people to tell me what I'm wrong about.
