Current Events > I don't even understand what Gamergate was about

(+) Yeah! (+)

All I know is in hindsight a lot of folks who are now alt-right jobbers seemed to talk about it

but I have no idea what is was or what people had hoped to achieve, or how it started
---

Ethics in gaming journalism, duh.
---

It started as a rally against indie game journos who rigged reviews and game competitions for their friends. It turned into something much larger and often uglier as the number of participants grew.
---

neckbears
feminists
idiots
---

Originally it was something to do with some developer sleeping around to get better reviews for their game. Then it devolved into bitter virgins upset they'll be forever alone. Now I don't know anymore either.
---

Honestly, there were far better battles to pick like Jeff Gerstmann and Geoff Keighley if you wanted to criticize gaming journalism. I have no idea why people latched onto Zoe Quinn.
---

SGT_Conti posted...

Honestly, there were far better battles to pick like Jeff Gerstmann and Geoff Keighley if you wanted to criticize gaming journalism. I have no idea why people latched onto Zoe Quinn.

Because she latched onto them. There are quite a few people on BOTH sides of that fight that effectively got famous solely from keeping themselves in the center of the argument.
---

SGT_Conti posted...

Honestly, there were far better battles to pick like Jeff Gerstmann and Geoff Keighley if you wanted to criticize gaming journalism. I have no idea why people latched onto Zoe Quinn.

I don't know who that first person is, but people shit on Geoff Keighley all the time.
---

I've tried understanding it on several occasions and I just don't. It seems like you need to be really into gaming journalism (lol) to come close to giving a shit.
---

It was never about anything legitimate. Reminder, the whole thing started because a jealous ex-boyfriend wrote a public letter about Zoey Quinn, which made allegations of infidelity. It didn't make any difference that the letter was unsubstantiated, the anti-women GamerGate "activists" took it as gospel regardless.

Given that the seeds of it were poisoned with misogyny to begin with, it's not surprising it became a vehicle of backlash against feminism and feminists, LGBT, and ethnic diversity in video games.

Doom_Art posted...

but I have no idea what is was or what people had hoped to achieve, or how it started

It's better to not know, really.
Just a bunch of noise and blathering, that ended up being overblown bullshit meaning nothing.

Malcolm_McGuffi posted...

It was never about anything legitimate. Reminder, the whole thing started because a jealous ex-boyfriend wrote a public letter about Zoey Quinn, which made allegations of infidelity. It didn't make any difference that the letter was unsubstantiated, the anti-women GamerGate "activists" took it as gospel regardless.

Given that the seeds of it were poisoned with misogyny to begin with, it's not surprising it became a vehicle of backlash against feminism and feminists, LGBT, and ethnic diversity in video games.

I mean, are we just going to pretend that the society of professional journalists never held a debate on the topic and sided with GG on the subject of their primary complaints about the game journo industry? You can watch the actual debates online and (outside of Milo being there and being the usual shit he is) they cover pretty much all the legit issues.
---

Neither did anyone involved
---

Is Zoey Quinn the transgender one? Or is that a different journalist?
---

s0nicfan posted...

It started as a rally against indie game journos who rigged reviews and game competitions for their friends. It turned into something much larger and often uglier as the number of participants grew.

l Dudeboy l posted...

Originally it was something to do with some developer sleeping around to get better reviews for their game. Then it devolved into bitter virgins upset they'll be forever alone. Now I don't know anymore either.

Quinn never "slept around" for a review. The person in question never reviewed her game. There are chat logs from the early days before the "muh ethics" excuse with people saying their goal was to harass her into killing herself.

Those NEET idiots hated her since depression quest for whatever reason it was that their wizardchan site or w/e got pissed at her.
---

Alt-right jobbers?
---

It was about "ethics in gaming journalism". Except it really never was. People got mad at Zoe Quinn for some unsubstantiated claims that she slept with a reviewer to get a better score for an indie game that previously nobody cared about. They might have claimed it was about journalism ethics, but it was mostly about people (mostly women) making games that don't have traditional gameplay or subject matter. It was people who didn't like others crowding their hobby.

Of course the gaming journalism side didn't respond in a particularly great way and kind of just threw more gas onto the fire with some articles that probably attacked an overly broad group of people, thus getting more people dragged into the fight that had previously not been apart of it.

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of things wrong with gaming journalism, especially with how cozy the various major websites are with the producers and companies, but that's never really what Gamergate was about.
---

Gheb posted...

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of things wrong with gaming journalism, especially with how cozy the various major websites are with the producers and companies, but that's never really what Gamergate was about.

Dorito Pope is vastly more relevant to "ethics in gaming journalism" than gamergate could ever be, yes.

Letron_James posted...

neckbears

---

Something about a very annoying bitch named Anita.
---

I mean, it was a huge number of things. It was a protest about the ethical misconduct of video game journalists and a look into the seedy underbelly of the quid pro quo of it.

Then it was a war between Zoe Quinn and 4Chan after she doxxed herself and blamed it on wizardchan because they talked shit about her game/called into question her knowledge/experience with depression. Wu falls in here after having posted a "call to action" against her that had a file creation date before the thing even started. Maybe had something to do with that failed kickstarter.

Then it was a war between third wave feminism and literally everyone else.

Then it was escapist vs kia.

Then it was jounalists vs gamers.

Then it was shit-flingers vs everyone because lulz.

All of which after about day 8 were occuring and ongoing simultaneously for pretty much the entire duration. It wasn't "about" anything by week 3.
---

Gheb posted...

Of course the gaming journalism side didn't respond in a particularly great way and kind of just threw more gas onto the fire with some articles that probably attacked an overly broad group of people

"probably"?

Such articles appeared concurrently in Gamasutra ( Gamers are over and A guide to ending gamers ), Destructoid (There are gamers at the gate, but they may already be dead), Kotaku (We might be witnessing the death of an identity ) and Rock, Paper, Shotgun (Gamers are over), as well as Ars Technica (The death of the gamers ), Vice (Killing the gamer identity) and BuzzFeed (Gaming is leaving gamers behind).

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2014/09/gamergate_explodes_gaming_journalists_declare_the_gamers_are_over_but_they.html
---

Depression Quest was made in Twine for fuck sake. It is not even a cruddy walking simulator and Nathan Grayson called it Twine darling Depression Quest.
---

It was about fake outrage and something for people to needlessly get upset about

Also provided a reason for some gamers to threaten and harass other people
---

What wasn't it about?

Ethics in journalism
Slut shaming
Sexual harassment
Feminism
Patriarchy
Misogyny

Neckbeards getting mad at women for... Existing? Idk
---

Reversing gender roles, being pc, etc.
---

s0nicfan posted...

It started as a rally against indie game journos who rigged reviews and game competitions for their friends. It turned into something much larger and often uglier as the number of participants grew.

i always found it odd that it started with what was probably the most honest subset of games reviewing

indie games that suck are usually shit on, indie games that are good get an 80.

AAA games that suck usually get an 80

because reviews of those games are pretty much paid advertising

i always felt like that was the portion of the whole thing i could get behind
---

Darkman124 posted...

s0nicfan posted...

It started as a rally against indie game journos who rigged reviews and game competitions for their friends. It turned into something much larger and often uglier as the number of participants grew.

i always found it odd that it started with what was probably the most honest subset of games reviewing

indie games that suck are usually shit on, indie games that are good get an 80.

AAA games that suck usually get an 80

because reviews of those games are pretty much paid advertising

i always felt like that was the portion of the whole thing i could get behind

It started there, IIRC, because people expected better. Pretty much since Kayne and Lynch most gamers had expected that any AAA review site was just corporate shilling. I think what made GG take off in part was that small time reviewers were supposed to be "by gamers for gamers" and when it started to come out that it was a pretty incestuous crowd that took a lot of favors in exchange for reviews it felt like a betrayal.

One of the only positive things to come from the whole mess was Deep Freeze where you can actually catalog ethical breeches for posterity:
http://www.deepfreeze.it/
---

I must have been asleep during that cause it somehow polarized everyone but I still don't get what it was about. Every explanation about what gamergate was about leaves me thinking "and...?"
Compared to the impact it had, it seems so minor. I'm not sure the alt right would have gained as much traction as they did if gamergate never happened. It seemed to have divided gamers in general and alot of my hobbies and favorite settings are apparently white supremacist ones now (for some reason the alt right loves warhammer 40k and paradox games and I like those too but hate white supremacists)
---

In summary

Video game journalists generally don't know or care much about video games. They were and still are a bunch of self-important prats who mostly want to push their social agenda through their articles which they treat more like a blog than anything. For this reason, they've been hated for a long time by people who actually are fans of video games. Exhibit A:

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

^ Now imagine someone uploading something like that to their "review", and also that this person calls you a bigot for rejecting feminist themes in the video games that they themselves clearly don't even play.

It got annoying.

Then it was revealed that Zoe Quinn, a mediocre video game developer who was endlessly praised by these same poser video game journalists, was sleeping with the head editor of Kotaku whom wrote one of her games a glowing review. It might have been true, it might not have been true, but it made a lot of sense that these wannabe journalists were on the take. Blood was in the water, and it gave fans the impetus to revolt against the video game media and their incessant social agenda.

Gamergate, despite being written off as a bunch of neckbeards whining over a female developer getting a little preferential treatment, was actually the first major rejection of the progressive agenda. Gamergate supporters were branded sexists by the media, but little did they know this only added fuel to the fire. Most fandoms would retreat rather than be labeled a bigot, but gamers aren't most fandoms.

See, every male under the age of 40 likes video games and quite of bit of women do too, and many became deeply ingrained in the politics of it thanks to Gamergate. They recognized the allegations of sexism for what they were: shameless deflection. So the more journalists frothed at the mouth about sexism and the patriarchy and racism and etc etc etc, the more it soured gamers to progressives' identity politics, and a lot of largely centrist people became increasingly hostile to the politically correct nonsense of the left. Some even attribute Gamergate as the catalyst for Trump's sudden popularity

Exhibit B:



tl;dr: Video game journalists are progressive assholes and gamers punished them by electing Donald Trump.
---

No one appreciates my excellent writeup?

Did it help at all, tc
---

I think I missed all of it.
---

It was about getting feminism out of gaming. Zoe Quinn was an easy target after it came out she slept with some people in the industry thanks to an ex.

Mal_Fet posted...

No one appreciates my excellent writeup?

Did it help at all, tc

Because it's filled with inaccuracies.

Mal_Fet posted...

Then it was revealed that Zoe Quinn, a mediocre video game developer who was endlessly praised by these same poser video game journalists, was sleeping with the head editor of Kotaku whom wrote one of her games a glowing review.

Nothing here is correct. Which is why you didn't name the editor or link the review.

This is what made Gamergate especially effective. A whole lot of accusations flooded out there with barely any time to breathe or reply.
---

Darkman124 posted...

s0nicfan posted...

It started as a rally against indie game journos who rigged reviews and game competitions for their friends. It turned into something much larger and often uglier as the number of participants grew.

i always found it odd that it started with what was probably the most honest subset of games reviewing

indie games that suck are usually shit on, indie games that are good get an 80.

AAA games that suck usually get an 80

because reviews of those games are pretty much paid advertising

i always felt like that was the portion of the whole thing i could get behind

That came up the year before.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/doritosgate

A writer wrote about examples where journalists are moving onto PR jobs with publishers which should clearly call their credibility to account. Only for him to get slapped with a cease and desist from another journalist. The concept was simple and easy to understand.

Of course 5 years later nobody asks about Doritosgate anymore. Total shame.
---

Darmik posted...

Nothing here is correct. Which is why you didn't name the editor or link the review.

Ok, Nathan Grayson was a lead writer at Kotaku, not an editor. Ya got me.
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Darmik posted...

Nothing here is correct. Which is why you didn't name the editor or link the review.

Ok, Nathan Grayson was a lead writer at Kotaku, not an editor. Ya got me.

And the review?
---

Darmik posted...

It was about getting feminism out of gaming. Zoe Quinn was an easy target after it came out she slept with some people in the industry thanks to an ex.

Mal_Fet posted...

No one appreciates my excellent writeup?

Did it help at all, tc

Because it's filled with inaccuracies.

Mal_Fet posted...

Then it was revealed that Zoe Quinn, a mediocre video game developer who was endlessly praised by these same poser video game journalists, was sleeping with the head editor of Kotaku whom wrote one of her games a glowing review.

Nothing here is correct. Which is why you didn't name the editor or link the review.

This is what made Gamergate especially effective. A whole lot of accusations flooded out there with barely any time to breathe or reply.

Hey now, the "mediocre video game developer" part is correct.

But seriously, it is true that the guys she slept with didn't review her game. As far as I recall, the most you can say about Nathan Grayson is he mentioned it positively in articles he wrote, but that typically was alongside other indie games. You might be able to claim there is some murkiness there, I guess. I think he also shows up in the credits for the game, but I'm not super sure about the details on that.

I think one of the other guys she slept with was on a panel that gave her game an indie award. But it's been so long since I looked into it, my recollection isn't the best.

Regarding the Doritogate, if I recall, Gamergate reps did mention it among their list of concerns on a panel at a SPJ conference. That was a couple years ago though.
---

Esrac posted...

Hey now, the "mediocre video game developer" part is correct.

The game was also free. Which everybody fails to mention for some reason. Probably because that would ruin the corruption narrative a bit.
---

Darmik posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

Darmik posted...

Nothing here is correct. Which is why you didn't name the editor or link the review.

Ok, Nathan Grayson was a lead writer at Kotaku, not an editor. Ya got me.

And the review?

Yes, he really did write a rave review for her dumb depression game
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Darmik posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

Darmik posted...

Nothing here is correct. Which is why you didn't name the editor or link the review.

Ok, Nathan Grayson was a lead writer at Kotaku, not an editor. Ya got me.

And the review?

Yes, he really did write a rave review for her dumb depression game

So where is it?
---

Darmik posted...

Esrac posted...

Hey now, the "mediocre video game developer" part is correct.

The game was also free. Which everybody fails to mention for some reason. Probably because that would ruin the corruption narrative a bit.

I don't think it's especially relevant. Even if the game is free, it could be argued, it being successful would get her some valuable notoriety.

But, hey, that seems to have happened anyway.
---

Neither do I.
I recall making a topic asking about it and it seems like nobody else really knew either and they told me that the whole thing is pointless because I would get different answers from different people.
---

Sparksfanboy posted...

I'm so happy that gamergate came along and injected politics into every aspect of our hobby. I so enjoy politics coming up in every gaming discussion ever since.

Thank you brave warriors for allowing the gaming industry to play politics as a smokescreen for micro transactions, day one dlc, and loot crates.

This
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Darmik posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

Darmik posted...

Nothing here is correct. Which is why you didn't name the editor or link the review.

Ok, Nathan Grayson was a lead writer at Kotaku, not an editor. Ya got me.

And the review?

Yes, he really did write a rave review for her dumb depression game

Come on, buddy.

I'm sympathetic to Gamergate and have defended them on occasion and I would tell you the "sex for review" claim was inaccurate.

Kitt posted...

Neither do I.
I recall making a topic asking about it and it seems like nobody else really knew either and they told me that the whole thing is pointless because I would get different answers from different people.

Gamergate is different things to different people, I guess.
---

Esrac posted...

I'm sympathetic to Gamergate and have defended them on occasion and I would tell you the "sex for review" claim was inaccurate.

I didn't even say the allegation was accurate
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Esrac posted...

I'm sympathetic to Gamergate and have defended them on occasion and I would tell you the "sex for review" claim was inaccurate.

I didn't even say the allegation was accurate

Mal_Fet posted...

Yes, he really did write a rave review for her dumb depression game

This crap is exactly why Gamergate got a lot of shit. So much misinformation was spread around as fact. The actual motive of the outrage was obvious to anyone who did a little bit of research.
---

Darmik posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

Esrac posted...

I'm sympathetic to Gamergate and have defended them on occasion and I would tell you the "sex for review" claim was inaccurate.

I didn't even say the allegation was accurate

Mal_Fet posted...

Yes, he really did write a rave review for her dumb depression game

This crap is exactly why Gamergate got a lot of shit. So much misinformation was spread around as fact. The actual motive of the outrage was obvious to anyone who did a little bit of research.

https://archive.is/NeJis

He calls her game a "powerful Twine darling". It's one of the three games he specifically recommends among fifty others.
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Darmik posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

Esrac posted...

I'm sympathetic to Gamergate and have defended them on occasion and I would tell you the "sex for review" claim was inaccurate.

I didn't even say the allegation was accurate

Mal_Fet posted...

Yes, he really did write a rave review for her dumb depression game

This crap is exactly why Gamergate got a lot of shit. So much misinformation was spread around as fact. The actual motive of the outrage was obvious to anyone who did a little bit of research.

https://archive.is/NeJis

He calls her game a "powerful Twine darling". It's one of the three games he specifically recommends among fifty others.

And do you honestly think those three words justified the movement? Because if it did I have no earthly idea why people bothered being disingenuous and tried to claim that article was a review (an article that lists 50 games).

IIRC the affair was after that article anyway.
---