Important message to our users regarding online harassment

  • 122 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for GLOK1132
GLOK1132

116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 GLOK1132
Member since 2009 • 116 Posts

Not knowing anything about this whole "gamergate" thing, I looked it up. And to me it looks like someone was mad at their ex and said some stupid things. Then it got blown way out of proportion by internet trolls. Seriously. Who takes anything said by trolls to heart. If a 5 year old calls you a "stupid head", are you going to take that personally and lash out at a child? No. Trolls are just like children. They are going to say dumb things. Just brush it aside and go on with your life.

Avatar image for deactivated-58270bc086e0d
deactivated-58270bc086e0d

2317

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 113

User Lists: 0

#52 deactivated-58270bc086e0d
Member since 2006 • 2317 Posts

Well that was pointless. You basically wrote an article saying we don't like bullying. I wouldn't have expected anything less to be honest. What were you going to do instead? Write an article about how you don't want gay people and women in gaming any more and flush your entire site and the jobs of those working at it down the toilet in one wet spiral?

Avatar image for theteaface
theteaface

172

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53 theteaface
Member since 2010 • 172 Posts

Thanks GS; that's why I come here. Thank you.

Avatar image for getupandboogie
getupandboogie

93

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#54  Edited By getupandboogie
Member since 2013 • 93 Posts

Honestly, I must have blinked and missed all this.. I know there's 'fan boys' ragging on each others consoles, but I put that down to children trying to justify their purchase to the rest of the world (when the rest of the world really doesnt care, apart from the same people alike who bought the other console). The rest just want to play games. Case in point being Bayonetta 2. How many people were upset the game got a 10 just because it wasnt on the xbone or ps4?

Then there is the internet culture, when if you dont like something, you HAVE to let the world know in the most uninspiring way possible ("Nintendo sucks, its for kids etc"), I guess we are all guilty of doing it at some point, but I try when I dont like something, i try and justify it.

That being said, this internet hate culture is nothing that isnt new to me. Its been going on for years. I dont get it and I dont like it, but why has it become a focal point all of a sudden? Did i miss something major?

Avatar image for dholliplay
dholliplay

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#56 dholliplay
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

It's an important issue we should all be talking more about. I'll just paste what I said in the article comments (not sure if that's still buggy):

Modern games have too much mindless violence in them. It's fine in games that demand lots of violent action (Yakuza, Crackdown, Saints Row, Gears Of War, Just Cause, military shooters etc) as that is what these games are about, but the problem is games are being released and marketed as 'serious', 'mature', 'emotional', 'story-driven', 'artistic' and 'realistic' like the Tomb Raider reboot, Last Of Us, Bioshock and many more. Yet what does the player do in these games? He violently kills hundreds of mindless goons.

It's having an effect on the mindset of the gamer who, subconsciously, is projecting his lack of empathy for 'mindless goons' to an anonymous online populace. He doesn't feel it's a problem because the marketing folk tell him the games he's playing are 'mature'.

Further to that, we have the negative treatment of women: either in games, or from boys/men commenting on female writers/gamers/developers. How many 'mature' games have to show us scantily-clad sex objects on their covers?

The entire video games industry is (still) horrendously immature, and it's this disease which is feeding the bad behaviour of the users online.

Avatar image for UltimateBastard
UltimateBastard

1301

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#57  Edited By UltimateBastard
Member since 2010 • 1301 Posts

To be fair, you guy's don't help the issue, throwing fuel on the fire with your PS4/XB1 graphics comparisons every week.

Avatar image for savagerodent
SavageRodent

825

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#58 SavageRodent
Member since 2014 • 825 Posts

"Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me."

"Names" is an implication of hostile words written to or about you. This is all of what the internet is honestly. To be bothered by people's behaviors on the internet shows how weak you are. The internet is not the place for such individuals who cannot accept other people for who or what they are. I don't like bullying, but not having any harassment or hostility on the internet is like having world peace.

I said this in my comment on the article, but I'll say it again. We don't need journalists. We don't have to believe or care what journalists say or do. If you don't like what their opinions are or what they do, then pay no attention to them and just leave. Arguing won't solve anything. I come up with my own thoughts, opinions, and theories on the news that I get from this site. This is what I believe people should do, but I feel they don't and just blindly follow what they hear and read.

Avatar image for neal_douglas
neal_douglas

68

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#59  Edited By neal_douglas
Member since 2003 • 68 Posts

I am a long time site user but I rarely feel the need to comment or discuss online. I'd just like to say thanks for posting this. The internet can be a horrible place sometimes, or indeed most of the time, it's beyond belief that something like this needed to be posted but I am glad that it has been. We need more female characters in games, and we need more women in game development.

Avatar image for bunchanumbers
bunchanumbers

5709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#60  Edited By bunchanumbers
Member since 2013 • 5709 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:

I wasn't aware gamespot was being abused. Seemed to be a bunch of people from other sites but gamespot. Eh, wasn't really following the gamergate thing anyway, got boring fast.

popular rumor is that KVO said something against GG involving someone's suicide. I have no idea if its true though.

Avatar image for slipperypete848
slipperypete848

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 slipperypete848
Member since 2011 • 54 Posts

@mondoben: Unfortunately, many gamers are morons. Sad but true. I love you guys and the honesty, keep up the good work!

Avatar image for blackbetty1974
blackbetty1974

116

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#62  Edited By blackbetty1974
Member since 2013 • 116 Posts

To those who feel disenfranchised by Gamespot"s editorial direction, I would say this. Instead of raging in the comments and forums, thus supplying them with clicks and ad revenue, simply leave. As consumers, Gamespot needs us, not the other way around. So I say leave it to the SJWs and hipsters. There are plenty of other places to get your gaming news, that don't insult, or belittle their readers. So join me whilst i jump the proverbial ship. Goodbye and good luck.

Avatar image for mondoben
mondoben

43

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

#63 mondoben  Staff
Member since 2006 • 43 Posts

Thanks to those of you posting support. I realise that for some our statement will be too much, for others not enough - that's the inherent peril of the internet, damned if you do and damned if you don't. I am serious about us leading by example however, and that means listening to your feedback regarding direction and providing the kind of content and community this passionate audience deserves.

That doesn't mean political grandstanding or lecturing - it does mean a varied landscape of opinion, perspective and personality. And yes respectful dialogue that doesn't result in the kind of bullying and harrasssment we've seen across this industry.

Avatar image for nurnberg
nurnberg

1313

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#64  Edited By nurnberg
Member since 2005 • 1313 Posts

I am sorry Gamespot, but you need to distance yourself from radical feminists and their views. They are a fringe group at best. They do not represent women. Just because someone talk against them doesn't mean they are some mysogynist that hate women. This is why people are so pissed off. Stop calling people mysoginists and stuff like that just because they dare to talk against a Kickstarter con artist. Women were part of the gaming scene long before those professional SJW victims became the center of attention.

Avatar image for WuShogun212
WuShogun212

97

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 WuShogun212
Member since 2013 • 97 Posts

@Fenriswolf:

@Fenriswolf said:

@WuShogun212 said:

To the gamers making death threats, I wish they wouldn't but I understand the rage. When "we" the average gamers are not being heard we take out our frustration on people over the internet, some are presenting great arguments and others are making unjustifiable death threats. Just like in any society where the people are not being represented there is a protest or a revolt against the person causing the injustice or the system who are supporting them. All the media is focused on is the gamers who are making threats not the gamers who are making rational intelligent counter points to issues like feminist attacks on gaming. In the message you guys posted in the news section you said you "refuse to give oxygen to a disturbing minority who seek to use this debate as an excuse for their own appalling actions", but that's not true, you would rather post about gamers threatening the life of someone than reporting gamers making intelligent points, you promote one for clicks but ignore the other. You're not only giving them oxygen you're feeding them a hot meal and running a nice warm bath for them too. Women, journalist, and developers wouldn't be getting attacked if the gaming media presented both sides fairly, but they don't, so instead of informing people you are just adding more ignorance to an all ready ignorant filled community.

In other words, you're engaging in victim blaming. Cultural products, be it gaming, music, films, or films, gets criticized all the time by a variety of different positions. Hell, I enjoy watching certain movies with hyper-masculine heroes slaughtering hundreds of mooks, and there are all sorts of criticism on its gender, race, and class contents. I read such critiques, and still chose to enjoy such films regardless, because I understand that acknowledging someone's else's position doesn't have to come at a cost of your own. If you're so insecure about your beliefs that an article makes you lash out and send people death threats, then the problem lies with you, not the other person.

I completely agree but the problem still stands, which I was emphasizing in my comment, that websites like Gamespot give focus ONLY on the people who are sending death threats, and never focusing on the gamers who bring an intelligent counter argument to the table. Which in turn leads less informed people to believe that all gamers are making threats and that the gaming community as a whole is a commune of filthy immoral degenerates. If they post a video from Anita talking about how sexist and misogynistic games can be then they should post a video (one of thousands of them) arguing against that opinion to give the readers two sides of this (what I hope it to be one day) debate, because right now it is not a debate, but a one sided onslaught without any resistance. I'm definitely not blaming the victims of death threats, I'm putting the blame with the people who have a power to educate a sizable portion of the gaming community, the journalists and editors of gaming websites like this one. We all know that the gaming community can get a little..."passionate" about subjects like feminism, but instead of adding fuel to the fire like Gamespot and other websites do by only reporting one side, they should use this opportunity to inform people on both sides, so they can see that there is resistance being presented instead of being completely ignored, which would lead to less anger because they know that it is a fair conversation.

Avatar image for gsbliss
gsbliss

46

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#66 gsbliss
Member since 2006 • 46 Posts

I left this comment on the original article, but am again posting it here.

The biggest group of "grotesque" and "abhorrent" commentators on this and other game websites are the feminist ideologues who have shown themselves to be hypocrites and hate-mongers. They trash all gamers; even those who roundly dismantle their paper-thin, intellectually bankrupt feminist arguments with well thought out and politely worded messages. Feminism is the poison that you would truly come out against if you all weren't a bunch of cowards, not the clumsy comments of poorly educated and frustrated young men, many of whom feel disenfranchised in a society that trashes them every chance it gets. This website and others have become toxic environments for those who are 'just interested in gaming,' and YOUR poor stewardship is to blame, not us. It is you that have failed us and continue to fail us by supporting hateful feminist ideology within this website.

Btw, why do you continue to run positive articles about the scam artist Anita Sarkeesian? When it comes out that her recent "massacre" death threat is her own fabrication (just the latest in a long line of highly suspicious "threats"), will you run a story on it? Right now, will you run a story about how University of Utah officials don't think the threats were credible and neither do the police who investigated them? Will you run a story about how feminist hypocrites like Anita Sarkeesian make handsome livings by exploiting our natural inclination to protect women to incite hysteria over the games industry's "treatment of women"? I won't bet on it, cowards.

Avatar image for ZICO11
ZICO11

166

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#67 ZICO11
Member since 2008 • 166 Posts

This issue is starting to get out of hand and some people are not making it any better

Avatar image for Randolph
Randolph

10542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#68  Edited By Randolph
Member since 2002 • 10542 Posts

@bunchanumbers: he also falsely accused an employee of RPGamer of harassing him for simply pointing out flaws in his paper thin attempts to smear people who disagree with him, and attempted to get him in trouble with his bosses for it as well. He actually had to make his twitter account protected for a few days after that.

GS had done a fine job staying out of all this until Van Ord saw fit to go stick his foot in his mouth. He is far from the good and trustworthy person he is assumed to be, anyone posting on the System Wars 2 UCB a few weeks/months before he became an editor can attest to that...

Avatar image for Tuckpoint
Tuckpoint

75

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 Tuckpoint
Member since 2013 • 75 Posts

I'm sure there are younger video game enthusiasts than myself that frequent your site, maybe they don't mind being patronized and condescended to, probably used to it. See, your audience isn't all children, in fact I'd wager my left testicle that a good percentage of your audience are 20+. Why would I do that? Because I have children, and they play games and the last thought that goes through their minds is "I WANNA READ SOMETHING", same with their friends. Older gamers are the ones that try to invest their money wisely due to the fact they have bills to pay, and they are the ones that place value on reviews and previews.

Why is it that moderators always eventually feel they need to act as parents to the people frequenting their sites? We have actual parents for that. You don't like your audience? Tough, you put yourself up on a public forum by which you ENSURE that you will be the subject of criticism.

This site perpetuates the "Console Wars" shamelessly, using crap titles and quotes that have been edited (not verbatim). During release it was nothing but "Which console won this month" or blah blah. Your very writing instigates petty internet arguments by making people think they need to defend their purchased toy because no matter which console you bought, you bought the lesser, dumber model and you must be mouth breather stupid to have done such a thing.

Not to mention that every other article has "1080p" or "30-60 FPS" blah blah. Now normally these are things I would want to know, but you insist on wording your articles in the most inflammatory way possible. Eddie Machooch is master of the click-bait article, and I guarantee that's exactly what he's after. Integrity doesn't even get considered because there's garbage to put out the door for the all-mighty paycheck. That's where my complaints have always been and I fully intend to call out people that refer to themselves as "journalists" each and every time they lazily forget to bring along their journalistic integrity to an article. See that whole integrity thing is what lends you credibility and will minimize the complaints you have. It's hard to argue with truth, but not so much when it comes to agenda pushing/bias/opinions. Don't prattle on about how a review is opinion, it's not. The important things: Tight controls, smooth frame rate, lack of bugs/glitches, esp game breaking ones. I couldn't care less if you think a game is misogynistic, overly graphic with its violence, or anything anyone might disagree with you about, SEEING AS HOW ITS OPINION.

You reap what you sow, and to listen to you people (by which I mean moderators, article writers (I refuse to call you journalists) and video content creators) turn on us, patronize us, condescend to us and then turn off the comments because your moderators aren't feeling like doing their job, is just as infuriating as watching you guys flush "gamers" down the toilet with your craptastic representation of us.

Turn on a profanity filter, let people say what they want, erase comments that are only there to personally attack and for the love of god stop trying to patronize me. At 36 years old, I can decide whether or not I want to write or read profanity.

Avatar image for Crush_Project
Crush_Project

606

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 49

User Lists: 0

#70  Edited By Crush_Project
Member since 2005 • 606 Posts

games in this day in age is made for the largest demographic: the lowest common denominator, and unless your part of this group and clapping at every travesty that comes out the industry simply doesn't want to hear from you.

Don't suppress your rage, let it out. Its only going to get worse if you sit idly by and say nothing as its done for over a decade. Its not a crime to have standards or want to see a layer depth and skill.

Avatar image for dogofsam23
dogofsam23

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#71  Edited By dogofsam23
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

I'm not sure I understand what's going on or what exactly happened. This article is very vague. An example of the trend would be enlightening. Was there some kind of threat that crossed the line? If so, deal with that on an individual basis.

Or is someone in the community or gamespot being a little sensitive that not everyone agrees that their words like "inclusiveness" "diversity" or "tolerance" actually mean what they say? Some view this political correctness cult to be disingenuous. Pushing ideas that have little or nothing to do with games themselves. And the media fans the flames of it to generate controversy and traffic just like this click bait article.

I've seem plenty of people on both sides of the argument become enraged and irrational. But something tells me any punitive action taken by mods in the future will be biased.

If you want to play tickle bear with sensitive issues that promote a version of creepy progressive far left wing free masonry. Don't expect a giggle in response.

Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#72  Edited By branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts

GameSpot disassociating itself from those who harass and bully is for the best and the same is true for keeping this site mostly uninvolved with the GamerGate situation as a whole. There is no bias in reporting death threats causing event cancellations or other occurrences related to that sort of thing. I suggest doing what you believe is best, so you can continue making quality content.

Avatar image for dogofsam23
dogofsam23

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#73  Edited By dogofsam23
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

@BranKetra: @BranKetra:

"but some of it has consisted of vicious and abhorrent attacks on individuals and groups within gaming, particularly on those calling for a more open and inclusive games industry."

They didn't disassociate themselves. They took a side in the argument and alienated those that don't agree that words like "diversity" "openess" and "inclusiveness" always mean what they say.

They did it in the first couple of paragraphs. Reporting threats in fine, but this casts doubt on gamespot's ability to manage their community in an impartial manner.

Avatar image for JoInfo
JoInfo

103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#74 JoInfo
Member since 2008 • 103 Posts

The only way to prove what is to come is to just wait and see. I have my suspicions that there is a silver lining within this Gamespot anti-harassment mission statement. I hope that if people are going to be free to post on hot button topics from a minority standpoint regarding sexual preference, religion, sexism, etc..., I'm not going to be censored and labeled as a "harasser" if I stand up for the conservative majority view. If done in a respectful manner, of course.

Honestly, I'm saddened that this heated BS has overflowed into the gaming industry. I use games to ESCAPE from garbage like this.

Avatar image for dogofsam23
dogofsam23

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#75 dogofsam23
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

@JoInfo:

"but some of it has consisted of vicious and abhorrent attacks on individuals and groups within gaming, particularly on those calling for a more open and inclusive games industry."

They picked a side in the first couple of paragraphs. I think it is clear they are incapable of managing the community in an unbiased manner.

Avatar image for super600
super600

32676

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#76 super600  Moderator
Member since 2007 • 32676 Posts

@nurnberg said:

I am sorry Gamespot, but you need to distance yourself from radical feminists and their views. They are a fringe group at best. They do not represent women. Just because someone talk against them doesn't mean they are some mysogynist that hate women. This is why people are so pissed off. Stop calling people mysoginists and stuff like that just because they dare to talk against a Kickstarter con artist. Women were part of the gaming scene long before those professional SJW victims became the center of attention.

GS statement was really neutral.They aren't really officially supporting anyone.

Avatar image for super600
super600

32676

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#77 super600  Moderator
Member since 2007 • 32676 Posts

@dholliplay said:

It's an important issue we should all be talking more about. I'll just paste what I said in the article comments (not sure if that's still buggy):

Modern games have too much mindless violence in them. It's fine in games that demand lots of violent action (Yakuza, Crackdown, Saints Row, Gears Of War, Just Cause, military shooters etc) as that is what these games are about, but the problem is games are being released and marketed as 'serious', 'mature', 'emotional', 'story-driven', 'artistic' and 'realistic' like the Tomb Raider reboot, Last Of Us, Bioshock and many more. Yet what does the player do in these games? He violently kills hundreds of mindless goons.

It's having an effect on the mindset of the gamer who, subconsciously, is projecting his lack of empathy for 'mindless goons' to an anonymous online populace. He doesn't feel it's a problem because the marketing folk tell him the games he's playing are 'mature'.

Further to that, we have the negative treatment of women: either in games, or from boys/men commenting on female writers/gamers/developers. How many 'mature' games have to show us scantily-clad sex objects on their covers?

The entire video games industry is (still) horrendously immature, and it's this disease which is feeding the bad behaviour of the users online.

As long as gamergate exists it will be hard to discuss some of these issues since some people will be scared of sharing there opinion.This problem may exist even after gamergate doesn't exist anymore.I think there needs to be a way to moderate discussion on the internet so it doesn't get out of control like what has happened with gamergate and a few other internet related incidents in the past, but this will be very hard to do.

Avatar image for nurnberg
nurnberg

1313

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#78 nurnberg
Member since 2005 • 1313 Posts

@super600:

@super600 said:

@nurnberg said:

I am sorry Gamespot, but you need to distance yourself from radical feminists and their views. They are a fringe group at best. They do not represent women. Just because someone talk against them doesn't mean they are some mysogynist that hate women. This is why people are so pissed off. Stop calling people mysoginists and stuff like that just because they dare to talk against a Kickstarter con artist. Women were part of the gaming scene long before those professional SJW victims became the center of attention.

GS statement was really neutral.They aren't really officially supporting anyone.

"particularly on those calling for a more open and inclusive games industry" Who do you think this statement is referencing?

Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#79  Edited By branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts
@dogofsam23 said:

@BranKetra: @BranKetra:

"but some of it has consisted of vicious and abhorrent attacks on individuals and groups within gaming, particularly on those calling for a more open and inclusive games industry."

They didn't disassociate themselves. They took a side in the argument and alienated those that don't agree that words like "diversity" "openess" and "inclusiveness" always mean what they say.

They did it in the first couple of paragraphs. Reporting threats in fine, but this casts doubt on gamespot's ability to manage their community in an impartial manner.

GameSpot did disassociate itself from those who harass and bully.

Also, I said GameSpot has remained mostly uninvolved in that whole situation. Narrowing your view to part of one sentence out of that entire message is not enough to understand its entirety. The first part of that sentence you quoted acknowledged one of the sides. The beginning of the statement is, "Some of this debate has focused on ethics in game journalism..." and the rest of that statement goes to focus on what is not appreciated which is harassment and bullying. It is quite clear that GameSpot sided with neither group involved, but is focusing on what is (and should be) viewed with zero tolerance: harassment and bullying. Later in the message, the appreciation of different perspectives is mentioned without alignment to that side of that situation.

Avatar image for dogofsam23
dogofsam23

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#80  Edited By dogofsam23
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

@BranKetra: In recent weeks, an increasingly fervent debate has raged online about video games. Some of this debate has focused on ethics in game journalism, but some of it has consisted of vicious and abhorrent attacks on individuals and groups within gaming, particularly on those calling for a more open and inclusive games industry.

"but some of it has consisted of vicious and abhorrent attacks on individuals and groups within gaming, particularly on those calling for a more open and inclusive games industry."

That's half the thesis statement right there with 1 supporting paragraphs that follows. It clearly blames one side for most of the problem if not all. Is there a longer article somewhere else? The last sentence of the thesis mostly blames one side.

Then they talking about their diverse team that's above it all blah blah blah and end with enforcement of their zero tolerance harassment policy.

It doesn't look like encouraging debate. They are sending a message to those that don't agree with them. It has little to do with harassment or bullying because they know both sides do it. Harassment and bullying could easily be handled on an individual basis quietly and in an impartial manner. But this shows they are more concerned with what one side of the community believes privately. It shows gamespot could be incapable of handling the diverse community it pretends to be. They need to improve their writing.

Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#81 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts

@dogofsam23: As I understand that situation, Gamergate calls for a more open industry as do those who wish for a more inclusive industry (hence the word "inclusive") both on the development and consumer sides. With that in mind, this message registered for me as a sign that harassment and bullying from either side will not be tolerated here. Saying the bullying of only one side of the debate is not allowed while devaluing the other would be a rather odd thing for this website to do.

Avatar image for Randolph
Randolph

10542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#82  Edited By Randolph
Member since 2002 • 10542 Posts

@super600: kind of like how there are people on the GG side scared to share their opinions. But you've made it clear you believe only one side must be held accountable in totality for the actions of any and all of it's members, while the other is completely exempt from that twisted logic.

Concern trolling and double standards are not hard to spot, super. We aren't as stupid as you think we are.

Avatar image for Old_Gooseberry
Old_Gooseberry

3958

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 76

User Lists: 0

#83 Old_Gooseberry
Member since 2002 • 3958 Posts

eh, they should fire everyone here except Kevin VanOrd, he is god.

Avatar image for Xcalibur_basic
Xcalibur_basic

87

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#84  Edited By Xcalibur_basic
Member since 2002 • 87 Posts

@dholliplay said:

It's an important issue we should all be talking more about. I'll just paste what I said in the article comments (not sure if that's still buggy):

Modern games have too much mindless violence in them. It's fine in games that demand lots of violent action (Yakuza, Crackdown, Saints Row, Gears Of War, Just Cause, military shooters etc) as that is what these games are about, but the problem is games are being released and marketed as 'serious', 'mature', 'emotional', 'story-driven', 'artistic' and 'realistic' like the Tomb Raider reboot, Last Of Us, Bioshock and many more. Yet what does the player do in these games? He violently kills hundreds of mindless goons.

It's having an effect on the mindset of the gamer who, subconsciously, is projecting his lack of empathy for 'mindless goons' to an anonymous online populace. He doesn't feel it's a problem because the marketing folk tell him the games he's playing are 'mature'.

Further to that, we have the negative treatment of women: either in games, or from boys/men commenting on female writers/gamers/developers. How many 'mature' games have to show us scantily-clad sex objects on their covers?

The entire video games industry is (still) horrendously immature, and it's this disease which is feeding the bad behaviour of the users online.

You're focusing too much on violent video games; there are plenty where the gameplay isn't about killing. They just don't appeal, aren't worth the money for their budget, or aren't worth the time to the mainstream gamer. Let's be honest, these mindless goons usually come with an evil back story and they're just video game NPC's. Would the story be believable if the player could just talk down every drug dealing gangster in GTA to not shoot you? What do you think would happen in real life? Video games come with a rating so that they are sold to the appropriate age group. For the rest of us mature gamers, we can make the distinction of what is an interactive pixel enertainment and what is real life. If a person can't, I suppose real life is their second life and they need help.

Writers and developers, regardless of gender, will always be criticized and more so when they say "gamers are dead." As for female gamers comment, I can only assume you are talking about the profanity which goes both ways; it comes with the interaction and anonymity of being online. Those scantily clad on game covers aren't as common as it once was and there are many explanations to the character design ranging from being cute to they're supposed to be sexy to it's a culturally accepted type of thing (*cough* Japan and cosplay).

The bad behavior starts with real life which becomes more prevalent with being anonymous on the internet.

Avatar image for dogofsam23
dogofsam23

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#85  Edited By dogofsam23
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

@BranKetra: Well that makes sense if that's what you got out of it

The author seemed to be continuing the article from a broad base of issues. He should have been more clear perhaps citing some examples.

Avatar image for zombieseesmeat
zombieseesmeat

53

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#86  Edited By zombieseesmeat
Member since 2011 • 53 Posts

##

@WuShogun212 said:

I don't condone attacking anybody online or offline, but here is the problem I have with the whole gamers raging and/trolling people which seem to be mostly feminists pushing to improve the perception of woman in video games, YOU as a video game journalistic platform should not be taking one side of an issue such as feminist expressing ill informed "facts" on an art that we all love. As journalist you should report both sides and let's be honest the fear that most (if not all) these gaming sites have of feminists is sad, you don't even want to risk being in the line of their fire. You are more than willing to report/promote a new video that a feminist made about how video games are sexist or misogynistic but you won't even dare report the counter argument to these accusations. All we want is fair and balanced gaming journalism and not have to worry about an agenda being pushed or an article that presents a one sided criticism. I have yet to see a popular gaming website stand up and face/challenge the criticism games have been getting from feminists.

To the gamers making death threats, I wish they wouldn't but I understand the rage. When "we" the average gamers are not being heard we take out our frustration on people over the internet, some are presenting great arguments and others are making unjustifiable death threats. Just like in any society where the people are not being represented there is a protest or a revolt against the person causing the injustice or the system who are supporting them. All the media is focused on is the gamers who are making threats not the gamers who are making rational intelligent counter points to issues like feminist attacks on gaming. In the message you guys posted in the news section you said you "refuse to give oxygen to a disturbing minority who seek to use this debate as an excuse for their own appalling actions", but that's not true, you would rather post about gamers threatening the life of someone than reporting gamers making intelligent points, you promote one for clicks but ignore the other. You're not only giving them oxygen you're feeding them a hot meal and running a nice warm bath for them too. Women, journalist, and developers wouldn't be getting attacked if the gaming media presented both sides fairly, but they don't, so instead of informing people you are just adding more ignorance to an all ready ignorant filled community.

Gamespot should be a spot for gamers to come and get fair news on the hobby they absolute love, not a cesspool for imbalanced promotion of professional wolf crying "activists". Though I don't agree with the method of being heard I do share the same feeling of disappointment in the current journalism gaming has. I know its a long post but I think its important.

Gamespot.....this. is truth....see

gamergate is real

Avatar image for zombieseesmeat
zombieseesmeat

53

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#87 zombieseesmeat
Member since 2011 • 53 Posts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Espnr3yCRtM

Avatar image for super600
super600

32676

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#88  Edited By super600  Moderator
Member since 2007 • 32676 Posts

@Randolph said:

@super600: kind of like how there are people on the GG side scared to share their opinions. But you've made it clear you believe only one side must be held accountable in totality for the actions of any and all of it's members, while the other is completely exempt from that twisted logic.

Concern trolling and double standards are not hard to spot, super. We aren't as stupid as you think we are.

I was mostly referring to the non-gamergate people in my post, but what I wrote applies to both sides.I think both need to held accountable(people shouldn't be calling each other terrorists or etc or support the bullying of others). I also wasn't just referring to gamergate in my post.I mostly talk about one of the sides because there is usually more to talk about them, but I do not like the actions of some of the people that responded to the people involved in gamergate ever.

Avatar image for the_last_ride
The_Last_Ride

76371

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 122

User Lists: 2

#89 The_Last_Ride
Member since 2004 • 76371 Posts

@hxce said:

@The_Last_Ride: Hehe yeah, it's heated all right. System Wars has always been like that. IMO that boards just provokes. Just delete that section already.

it's not that it can't be a good part of GameSpot, mods just have to be stricter. You get chastised for having some sort of opinion about anything in there, same goes for OT really

Avatar image for super600
super600

32676

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#90  Edited By super600  Moderator
Member since 2007 • 32676 Posts

@Xcalibur_basic said:

@dholliplay said:

It's an important issue we should all be talking more about. I'll just paste what I said in the article comments (not sure if that's still buggy):

Modern games have too much mindless violence in them. It's fine in games that demand lots of violent action (Yakuza, Crackdown, Saints Row, Gears Of War, Just Cause, military shooters etc) as that is what these games are about, but the problem is games are being released and marketed as 'serious', 'mature', 'emotional', 'story-driven', 'artistic' and 'realistic' like the Tomb Raider reboot, Last Of Us, Bioshock and many more. Yet what does the player do in these games? He violently kills hundreds of mindless goons.

It's having an effect on the mindset of the gamer who, subconsciously, is projecting his lack of empathy for 'mindless goons' to an anonymous online populace. He doesn't feel it's a problem because the marketing folk tell him the games he's playing are 'mature'.

Further to that, we have the negative treatment of women: either in games, or from boys/men commenting on female writers/gamers/developers. How many 'mature' games have to show us scantily-clad sex objects on their covers?

The entire video games industry is (still) horrendously immature, and it's this disease which is feeding the bad behaviour of the users online.

You're focusing too much on violent video games; there are plenty where the gameplay isn't about killing. They just don't appeal, aren't worth the money for their budget, or aren't worth the time to the mainstream gamer. Let's be honest, these mindless goons usually come with an evil back story and they're just video game NPC's. Would the story be believable if the player could just talk down every drug dealing gangster in GTA to not shoot you? What do you think would happen in real life? Video games come with a rating so that they are sold to the appropriate age group. For the rest of us mature gamers, we can make the distinction of what is an interactive pixel enertainment and what is real life. If a person can't, I suppose real life is their second life and they need help.

Writers and developers, regardless of gender, will always be criticized and more so when they say "gamers are dead." As for female gamers comment, I can only assume you are talking about the profanity which goes both ways; it comes with the interaction and anonymity of being online. Those scantily clad on game covers aren't as common as it once was and there are many explanations to the character design ranging from being cute to they're supposed to be sexy to it's a culturally accepted type of thing (*cough* Japan and cosplay).

The bad behavior starts with real life which becomes more prevalent with being anonymous on the internet.

Wasn';t the gamer is dead stuff referring to the changing of the gaming culture? I don't think the people that used that term meant to say that gamers are actually dead even though some of the people that wrote those articles wrote things that were offensive to gamers inside of those articles.

Avatar image for Randolph
Randolph

10542

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#91 Randolph
Member since 2002 • 10542 Posts

@super600: I'm almost afraid to ask because the mental gymnastics you have employed to date are stroke inducing in their audacity, but how or why should one side be held more accountable than the other? I'm not a fan of either group being held accountable as a whole for the actions of a minority. Though I would point out that the harassment, death threats, doxxing, blacklisting, and etc. experienced by the GG side is very real, and the actions of the SJW bad minority are not in anyway a lesser evil than the actions of the bad minority of the GG side, it's just less known because it's not reported on for obvious reasons.

Avatar image for gamerboy100
gamerboy100

744

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#92 gamerboy100
Member since 2004 • 744 Posts

@slipperypete848: I'm pretty certain those "morons" are a minority and their behavior doesn't represent us gamers as a whole.

Avatar image for slipperypete848
slipperypete848

54

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#93 slipperypete848
Member since 2011 • 54 Posts

@gamerboy100: @gamerboy100: o yea, I agree. I consider myself an "older" gamer, more or less. But I bet most of those idiots tend to be on the younger side, not all of them, but most.

Avatar image for cholojones
CholoJones

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#94 CholoJones
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

A handful of assholes make death threats, an entire movement is maligned.

Most of the industry accepts bribes for positive review scores (this is how a 7.5 becomes a "ho-hum" score), absolute silence.

Avatar image for zombieseesmeat
zombieseesmeat

53

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#95  Edited By zombieseesmeat
Member since 2011 • 53 Posts

You want journalistic integrity....I'll give it to ya sport....Carl Kolchak....Now that that's some fine journalistic integrity....One day he's tracking Vampires, the next some headless freak on a motor bike...Then one day the vampires got all sparkly and the internet was invented.

Avatar image for Darkmoone1
Darkmoone1

2845

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#96 Darkmoone1
Member since 2008 • 2845 Posts

@The_Last_Ride said:

@hxce said:

@The_Last_Ride: Hehe yeah, it's heated all right. System Wars has always been like that. IMO that boards just provokes. Just delete that section already.

it's not that it can't be a good part of GameSpot, mods just have to be stricter. You get chastised for having some sort of opinion about anything in there, same goes for OT really

The name "System Wars" as a name alone gives signals to provoke and cause flames across anyone who has any sort of opinion that others don't agree with. That forum from the very beginning is flawed and has simply been a refuge of scum and trolling in this website and very rarely does anything constructive and meaningful in terms of a debate starts in SW. If anything needed to be scrapped in GS's website redesign, it should've been that forum.

Avatar image for Thanatos2k
Thanatos2k

16426

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#97  Edited By Thanatos2k
Member since 2004 • 16426 Posts

@mondoben said:

Thanks to those of you posting support. I realise that for some our statement will be too much, for others not enough - that's the inherent peril of the internet, damned if you do and damned if you don't. I am serious about us leading by example however, and that means listening to your feedback regarding direction and providing the kind of content and community this passionate audience deserves.

That doesn't mean political grandstanding or lecturing - it does mean a varied landscape of opinion, perspective and personality. And yes respectful dialogue that doesn't result in the kind of bullying and harrasssment we've seen across this industry.

If you really want to improve your content, this is what you do:

1. Stop clickbait copy/paste facts-what-are-those articles.

2. Stop inserting personal/poltical agendas into news coverage and game reviews.

3. Don't collude with other journalists about what news to run and who deserves coverage of their games.

4. Don't insult your audience.

5. Under no circumstances financially support developers or other journalists through Patreon and the like.

6. Disclose personal relationships with developers and other people you cover. If you're too cozy with them, recuse yourself from coverage/reviews.

7. Attempt to be as objective as possible in coverage/reviews.

8. Stop accepting freebies from game publishers. Stop signing corrupt contracts with publishers in order to get review copies. Never accept review embargoes that are later than the release date of a game.

Avatar image for dholliplay
dholliplay

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#98 dholliplay
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

@Xcalibur_basic said:

1) You're focusing too much on violent video games; there are plenty where the gameplay isn't about killing. They just don't appeal, aren't worth the money for their budget, or aren't worth the time to the mainstream gamer...Video games come with a rating so that they are sold to the appropriate age group. For the rest of us mature gamers, we can make the distinction of what is an interactive pixel enertainment and what is real life. If a person can't, I suppose real life is their second life and they need help.

2) Would the story be believable if the player could just talk down every drug dealing gangster in GTA to not shoot you? What do you think would happen in real life?

3) Writers and developers, regardless of gender, will always be criticized and more so when they say "gamers are dead." As for female gamers comment, I can only assume you are talking about the profanity which goes both ways; it comes with the interaction and anonymity of being online.

Hi mate, I've numbered the points so it's easier to follow my replies, as I'm not sure how to multi-quote. It may all be a bit TL:DR as it's an exploration into the theory.

1) That's the problem, tho'. And yes, they do need help.

The industry's creative output is ultra-focussed on committing violent acts against ostensibly other humans (regardless of their 'back-story', if they even have one). This lack of empathy our player character shows is reflected on to the gamer, who then goes online and continues the 'game' of attacking everything he sees.

Ever felt after a long session of GTA that after you go outside into the real world you have this strange urge to open random car doors and drive off? Or after an epic Splinter Cell session you then go out at night to get a pizza and looking at the streetlamps make you feel you should be shooting them?

This is a natural 'shadow' reaction to those long gaming sessions. They aren't harmful (if the sessions are kept in relative moderation), rather such effects are quite amusing (bit like how mild hallucinations from a psychedelic can be amusing). Most of us are morally fine and mature people, but not everyone is, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. The effect of continuously doing negative things to NPC's (ostensibly other people) can be detrimental to these morally-weak gamers, in that they carry this 'shadow' when they go online and gleefully abuse it.

Games with masses of violent combat shouldn't be criminalised like psychedelics, but their potential negative effect on a certain mindset should be respected. Age restrictions obviously aren't working, something else needs to change. In my view, this needs to be a broadening of game mechanics in mainstream titles to better filter out the masses of violence. Problem, of course, is that money dictates, and publishers are terrified to not include violent combat in their games (just ask the developers of Deadly Premonition and Alan Wake).

This is just my analysis. There is much more to this, of course. Nasty trolls aren't exclusive to gamers, they aren't all young, or indeed male. Perhaps the biggest reason for harassment of others online is because the 'troll' just thinks it's funny, nothing more. But I still maintain that the incessant video game violence is at least a part-cause of this lack of empathy this mindset has.

2) In real-life you wouldn't be violently killing hundreds of people in a short space of time. You would be involved in a harrowing act of violence and it would scar you for life, regardless of who 'won' the fight.

3) Perspective is required to fully appreciate the bigger picture here. We must in all cases be empathetic with any real victim. Assuming it's true that certain women developers have received personalised (publishing of real home address) death threats to themselves and their families, our support must default to them regardless of what we think of their views on other stuff. Rise above the debate and support the victim first. Trash this victimisation campaign first. Then continue the debate. I'm pro-transparency for journalism so automatically support a lot of Gamergate's case. But once death threats are involved my role on the debate pauses as now the focus is (and should be) on the victim and perpetrator of these threats.

What irks me is the huge fuss generated by tiny insignificant indie games from female developers. It's normal to receive little leg-ups in the industry, favours from people you know and the like. Anyone with any experience of the real world understands this old rule: "it's not what you know, it's who you know".

There's actually nothing fundamentally wrong with this as long as others still get opportunities (which the likes of Steam and Youtube allows). What is really a problem regarding gaming journalism are mainstream review sites being wary of publishing negative reviews of AAA-titles, the publishers of which have paid for advertising on said review site. This should be GG's focus. But instead the focus is on the 'little guy' - in these cases women, specifically free-to-play indie titles which perhaps offer a better understanding of depression, and a smartphone adventure game with an all-woman cast. These sound like titles that frankly deserve a leg-up in the industry. We should instead be chasing the big fish, no? It's the big fish who are dictating in which direction games are going, and they appear to be largely immune to critical reviews. Why isn't Gamergate focussing on this?

Perspective is lacking in this entire debate, and if we (collectively) don't find it, there won't be a satisfying end for anyone.

Avatar image for dholliplay
dholliplay

25

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#99  Edited By dholliplay
Member since 2014 • 25 Posts

@super600 said:

As long as gamergate exists it will be hard to discuss some of these issues since some people will be scared of sharing there opinion.This problem may exist even after gamergate doesn't exist anymore.I think there needs to be a way to moderate discussion on the internet so it doesn't get out of control like what has happened with gamergate and a few other internet related incidents in the past, but this will be very hard to do.

It's near impossible to moderate it. The sheer volume is too much. We need to instead look at our culture and ask why we have such negative elements within it.

Something else to consider is that our problems are causing huge waves right now:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/19/justice-secretary-chris-grayling-pledges-stiffer-sentences-for-internet-trolls

Avatar image for gamerboy100
gamerboy100

744

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#100  Edited By gamerboy100
Member since 2004 • 744 Posts

@slipperypete848: Could you clarify what you mean by "younger?" What age group, specifically? I myself am 24 years old. Do you mean younger or about that age? I'm just curious.