Cyberpunk Cop Killah (aka The Last Night)

[Gormongous]

I don't care if you don't want to do it. I'm not going to let people like these gaters ruin my word.

 

But my point was that while I understand where he's coming from when he gets upset about people quote-unquote attacking gamers, that is no excuse to align yourself with those who are attacking women who would otherwise be gamers (or not, should they choose not to call themselves such). The last thing I want to do is get into another argument on these forums where people look down on me for choosing to call myself a gamer.

 

I hope you've never felt that I look down on you for it, Twig, even though I've personally come to a place in my life where calling myself a "gamer" doesn't feel true to my relationship with games anymore. What I honestly can't stand are the people who see only two sides to the issue, either for hardcore gaming as a discrete culture or against it, and so they argue for the gamers even though there's a lot of messed-up stuff in which they don't believe being argued along with it. I like that you're here and a conspicuous voice for a self-reflexive and inclusive gamer identity that doesn't condone or even excuse harassment, misogyny, and gate-keeping. As far as I can tell, those are the historical legacies of #GamerGate from the past couple months, so maybe this whole mess is a crucible where new identities and labels can be formed.

[Twig]

That was an, uh, emotional reaction sort of sentence. I don't know if I've ever felt that anyone was actually looking down on me, personally, but certainly, even before this GamerGate business, there's generally a lot of "It's so weird and gross to call yourself a gamer. Nobody does that for movies or books!" That sort of thing. It always makes me go *Waluigi-Wah!* but I generally try not to make a big deal of it, at least.

[juv3nal]

I don't care if you don't want to do it. I'm not going to let people like these gaters ruin my word.

 

That's an admirable goal, but you could spend 24 hours a day arguing with gamer misogynists on twitter and make not a perceptible dent in attitudes. I don't have that kind of time. edit: though maybe more importantly than the time investment, I'd find the whole endeavour crushingly depressing.

[Twig]

I'm not arguing with anyone on Twitter.

[juv3nal]

I mean that's partly my point. That's largely where the gaters are ruining your word. If you're not engaging and speaking back there, that's letting then do so unopposed.

[Twig]

If that's how you choose to look at it, go right ahead. I'm not going to stop. Too bad!

[timsoret]

A gamer = someone who plays games.

You can't change the meaning. It's not 1984.

You're acting like you want Newspeak and changing / eradicating words to fit your opinions and establish a new truth, your own truth.

This won't happen, never.

 

I've been a gamer since I'm 3, playing Flashback, Ecco the Dolphin, then Tomb Raider, Oddworld, and Metal Gear Solid.

It is a deep part of who I am today. It's not "a choice". It's what I've been doing since I'm a kid, it's my passion.

I'm a gamer, just like some people are musicians, bikers, readers, etc.

This is not going to change because some of you decided the word is "tainted" because of an internet controversy in 2014.

 

And I make games for gamers. As a gamedev, as a gamer myself, and simply as someone with intellectual honesty, it would be utterly disrespectful to think that "gamers", my customers & my friends since I'm a kid, can be painted as a single, unique entity with one voice. Biased generalizations like that are a fallacious shortcut, are really toxic, and actually don't help to solve issues at all. It just makes everybody angry, which makes everything worse.

 

I prefer a positive attitude and actually creating stuff rather than arguing on internet to change things. That's why I'm making progressive games.

That's why I'm writing original characters. When was the last time you saw a bisexual main character ? Considering we share the same opinion about the evolution needed in video games, you should be encouraging my work, instead trying to paint me as evil / naive / supporting trolls.

 

It's my last time arguing on the topic in public, considering everything I say is twisted & used against me, and considering that "my opinion doesn't matter". I didn't come to engage in this discussion, but to defend myself from the attacks and to address the misconceptions I've read here about my person. It was nice talking to you, I hope you understand and respect my views, and I hope honesty & truth will triumph.

 

Tim.

[sucks2Bme]

This might be a little too loosely based on whats going on here but...

 

weren't those "Gamers are Dead" articles originally about how video games are no longer a niche hobby and are pervasive in our culture, and thus the label of gamer being applied to a hardcore minority of Video game, well, nerds, no longer applies? 

 

ie. as stated above, there are no "moviers"  or "TVers", and maybe soon there will be no gamers because everyone plays games.

 

also, a little about the topic at hand:

 

I have been a "gamer" for most my life as well (Zork, AMFV, Rogue, since we dropping cred) and ten years ago or so, there was a huge debate about whether games were art, and this probably still gets talked about today (i havent noticed it as much though). When I was a young gamer, gamers passionately tried to get non-gamers to take video games seriously as an artform and as a medium. Today, everyone plays some form of game and video games are at that point, I feel, where they are perceived as a valid medium and some games as art. 

 

The bigger something is, the more likely it will be criticized. And if games are being criticized by gamers, they are doing it because they love games and want them to improve. Not because they hate games and think they are creating misogyny. 

 

As gamers, we wanted our hobby to be taken seriously as an art form. What I get from Anita and others is the message of "Hey Hey, AAA studios. remember when we wanted games to be considered as art? How about making more games that do that, and explore mature themes responsibly, instead of  rehashing the same misogynistic shooters year after year." 

 

And of course she does it with a sledgehammer because internet, and no one likes to read more than two sentences before making up their mind. 

[brkl]

Because this is not 1984, the meaning of words is up to people and not governments. If you want to protect the meaning of 'gamer', defend it from Gamergate's attacks instead of siding with them. They are the one's who are changing its meaning, while many progressive people who play games see that meaning change and want nothing to do with the new connotations Gamergate is loading the word with. I'm a 'gamer' as long as the word means I love games in general, comparable to the word 'movie buff', another word I associate with. But if Gamergate gets their way and the meaning changes, I can't associate with the word anymore. If 'movie buff' meant I only wanted to allow Transformer movies to get made and receive attention, I wouldn't associate with that word either.

 

The "Gamers are dead" articles sometimes go a bit overboard: there are bookworms (or bibliophiles) and movie buffs. The main difference is that there are already all kinds of books so if there was an insular reactionary contingent of bookworms once upon a time, it was a long time ago. The term is fine as long as we don't let GG define it, and I still don't believe there are enough of them to do anything apart from ruining lives.

[Bolegium]

Tim,

 

The word 'gamer' is, like any other word, continually evolving in its meaning and usage. This change happens both on a large scale in wider culture, and on a small scale as individuals decide how to use that word. It's disappointing that you bring up Orwell's '1984' but have seemingly misunderstood much of it.

 

No one is trying to abolish the word 'gamer' from the English language (how would that even be possible?). Many people are critiquing the culture that identifies as 'gamers' due to evidence of systemic inequality and overwhelming harassment. Gamer culture is not being singled out unfairly, other aspects of society are and have always been critiqued as well. This critique did not begin in 2014, it has existed since the dawn of 'computer games'. I don't have a problem with critiques of gamers, so what about this makes you antagonistic?

 

You say you are offended by people making generalisations about gamers. Are you also offended by the harassment, death threats, violations of privacy, lies etc. that are being committed by self-described gamers? I hope you are, but your twitter feed and your posts here only seem to be about how you've been 'forced' to not self-identify as a gamer, and posts about how gamergate critics are 'wrong'. This leads me to believe that you may be pro-gamergate, or at least have very misplaced priorities.

 

You say you prefer creating rather than arguing over the internet, yet this is exactly what you are doing and the reason many people have taken issue with you. People haven't been 'twisting' your words against you, these are responses to the things you have said yourself. In fact you've been the one doing the twisting to paint yourself as being attacked. "Your opinion doesn't matter" is meant as a reminder that the opinions and experiences of the under-represented and oppressed carry far more weight and importance than those who are not. No one is saying that your opinions are worthless, only that there may be more qualified people to speak about certain topics than you or me.

 

You claim to be here to address misconceptions about yourself, thanks for taking the time. I hope you return the courtesy by addressing your own misconceptions about feminism, cultural critique, and the real nature of gamergate.

[Twig]

Ugh, see, this is why I didn't want to have that incredibly stupid argument about the word "gamer" because that's now all he focused on in his response. It was really such a minor point but you went and made it a big one, juv3nal! Shame on you! SHAME! I'm kidding. Or am I?! SHAME!!!

 

Welp.

 

Whatever. Another lost cause.

[TychoCelchuuu]

Ugh, see, this is why I didn't want to have that incredibly stupid argument about the word "gamer" because that's now all he focused on in his response. It was really such a minor point but you went and made it a big one, juv3nal! Shame on you! SHAME! I'm kidding. Or am I?! SHAME!!!

 

Welp.

 

Whatever. Another lost cause.

Eh, it's a lost cause no matter what, since he pulled the classic "people just twist my words and don't understand me, I'm out of here!" move, which is the rhetorical equivalent of quitting halfway through a game you're losing because your opponents are trash-talking you, even though in reality the "trash talk" is actually just attempts at friendly conversation.

[Justin Leego]

Hey Tim, thanks for stopping by to present your side of things. It's not an easy thing to do and I appreciate it. Hope to see you around!

[singlespace]

Eh, it's a lost cause no matter what, since he pulled the classic "people just twist my words and don't understand me, I'm out of here!" move, which is the rhetorical equivalent of quitting halfway through a game you're losing because your opponents are trash-talking you, even though in reality the "trash talk" is actually just attempts at friendly conversation.

No offense, but some of you guys come across as pretty hostile and condescending.

[Twig]

Eh, it's a lost cause no matter what, since he pulled the classic "people just twist my words and don't understand me, I'm out of here!" move, which is the rhetorical equivalent of quitting halfway through a game you're losing because your opponents are trash-talking you, even though in reality the "trash talk" is actually just attempts at friendly conversation.

Yeah you're probably right. Oh well.

[syntheticgerbil]

What I honestly can't stand are the people who see only two sides to the issue, either for hardcore gaming as a discrete culture or against it, and so they argue for the gamers even though there's a lot of messed-up stuff in which they don't believe being argued along with it.

I am not sure if you were referring to Tim Soret or not, but I don't feel like he is necessarily representing one extreme, even though some of his tweets seem to say so. Seems like his biggest problem is with Anita even though she didn't do anything wrong and the backlash is not her problem. Otherwise nothing he really has said says he is "Gamergate" like he seems to have been accused to be here in this thread.

 

If you guys really want someone to consider changing their mind, I don't think multiple forum goers berating them with dozens of long paragraphs works. I kind of keep seeing this around here lately. If anything if someone is going to write some long impassioned post disagreeing with someone's worldview, maybe it would be best for a bunch of you guys not to jump in right after and say the same thing multiple times right after? It's incredibly overwhelming to a lot of people who are newer here.

 

Oh, and on a side note, I hate separating the art from the artist, I'm glad to see this is a trend most people are not following anymore.

[Twig]

His original post was paragraphs long. If nobody had responded in kind, it would've been the "cherry-picking" he so hates Anita for. Which, ironically, he did when responding to my post!

 

Besides that, I said a lot of things I felt others hadn't addressed, whether because they disagreed with me or just didn't want to address it. And also, before he dropped the "I'm not going to talk about this anymore k bye" line, there were two long posts. Mine and Bjorn's. The rest were incredibly short and even thankful to him for taking the time to explain his position (which was "no I'm moderate though so it's okay don't hate me (also buy my game)").

 

At any rate, I don't really think that guy was arguing in good faith in the first place. I think he came here to beg people to please still consider buying his game. So I'm not going to have trouble sleeping at night.

[Gormongous]

I am not sure if you were referring to Tim Soret or not, but I don't feel like he is necessarily representing one extreme, even though some of his tweets seem to say so. Seems like his biggest problem is with Anita even though she didn't do anything wrong and the backlash is not her problem. Otherwise nothing he really has said says he is "Gamergate" like he seems to have been accused to be here in this thread.

 

It's hard to condense a lot of these opinions down into sizes fit for discussion, but I think that it's fair to interpret from Soret's post (and he should feel free to correct me, because I don't know shit) that the label of "gamer" is important enough to him that he doesn't feel he should have to qualify or abandon it, no matter what awful stuff is being perpetrated by other "gamers" using that same label. I think it's one thing to say, like Twig does, that you're a gamer and you're going to push back against people who use that label for shitty things, and another entirely to say that you're a gamer but you're not accountable for any of that label's meanings beyond the ones that you personally find relevant. Both are valid, of course, but one of them feels a bit more defensible to me as an ideological stance. Not that he should have to defend himself to me, but that's his choice, too.

 

I also considered a long post, but then I realized that I'm not interested in debating where exactly the middle ground of this whole mess is. If you repost Sommers' videos without comment but call Sarkeesian "toxic" because you don't agree with her, if you say that culture is a "free market" of ideas but think that it's unfair to be judged by the actions of people who have chosen the same label as you, I just don't think we have a lot in common and my time is better spent elsewhere. No offense and good luck with the game, etc.

[Twig]

I also considered a long post, but then I realized that I'm not interested in debating where the middle ground of this whole mess is. If you repost Sommers videos without comment, call Sarkeesian "toxic" because you don't agree with her, say that it's unfair to be judged by the actions of people who have chosen the same label as you, and think that culture is a "free market" of ideas, I just don't think we have a lot in common and my time is better spent elsewhere. No offense and good luck with the game, etc.

In the past five minutes I've come to realize that this is what I should have done.

 

I'm sorry for writing my post. It was unnecessary in the grand scheme of things. I know that I'm belligerent and unyielding in my disgust for this "movement" and it shows every time I talk about it on these forums (and elsewhere, though of course you people don't have to deal with it elsewhere! - except for those of you cool enough to hang out in the IRC channel!!!). I'm not going to do it again.

[Denial]

I mean, the other thing - and it seems almost too obvious to be worth saying - is that Gamergate, from the early stages, wanted to end Danielle's career. If they've moved on from there, it's because they got bored, but AFAIK she's been the subject of harassment, and probably as a result of this will continue to be so for a long time to come...

[Spenny]

I think that the idea that "gamer" has, or should have a static meaning, is an idea incongruous with how the English language works. Additionally, as a self assumed label, similar to say "vegetarian", "anonymous", or "feminist", its meaning is subjective to the adopter, and by nature can not have a strict definition.

[syntheticgerbil]

I also considered a long post, but then I realized that I'm not interested in debating where exactly the middle ground of this whole mess is.

I guess I take issue because I would probably personally consider myself more middle ground in all of this. All I mostly see is just two extremes of Twitter drama constantly. I wish people would stop using fucking Twitter at this point, it's impossible to keep up with and it's like a convoluted message board at this point with absolutely no accountability or moderation. Like Gamergate, even though at it's core it's a stupid movement that people should move away from the label and spurred from false pretenses about Zoe Quinn and some sort of corruption from video games journalism, I do feel like at the end of the day beyond all of the constant abuse, death threats, and blatant misogyny, there's still a discussion to be had about these fucking Youtube celebrities, games journalism ethics and the tendency to create clickbait and gossip over substance, video game developer buddies and their cronies displaying overwhelmingly one demographic, and feminism and how it pertains to games. I feel like at some point when people calm down a middle ground can start to emerge.

 

Idle forums is just beginning to exhaust me with this stuff as it starts to feel like constant preaching to the choir, but maybe it's because I feel this OCD need to click all bold threads and make sure all messages are read or at least skimmed. I have started to get the feeling if anyone doesn't 100% agree with a lot of the sentiment around here with be bombarded with way too many messages and some just kind of quietly exit the forum (you can often check their latest posts and once they engage in the feminist thread they tend to be gone) or they get too mad and ornery and get banned (which is fine if they are pricks about it).

 

I personally give up on a lot of this stuff because I'm pretty shit at arguing well. I'm actually worried me typing more in this very thread is going to really upset me and I'll probably feel this need to type more and just feel stressed about coming here and clicking on the thread where I left a more controversial opinion no one seems ready to agree or at least agree to disagree. It doesn't feel good.

 

t any rate, I don't really think that guy was arguing in good faith in the first place. I think he came here to beg people to please still consider buying his game. So I'm not going to have trouble sleeping at night.

But that's the thing, I honestly don't think he would have registered at all had he not felt the need to clarify anything. I don't know why you guys don't think he didn't come here in good faith. I don't think it really read as an advertisement but instead a response since we all seemed to have liked the Game Jam (?) version before his opinions were known.

[Twig]

You may be right, but that's certainly not how it read. If I were in his shoes, I definitely wouldn't have ended my post with "please buy my game even if you disagree with me also here's a screenshot".

 

But whatever. I'm done posting in here. I'm done posting about this. Byeeeeeee.

[Gormongous]

I guess I take issue because I would probably personally consider myself more middle ground in all of this. All I mostly see is just two extremes of Twitter drama constantly. I wish people would stop using fucking Twitter at this point, it's impossible to keep up with and it's like a convoluted message board at this point with absolutely no accountability or moderation. Like Gamergate, even though at it's core it's a stupid movement that people should move away from the label and spurred from false pretenses about Zoe Quinn and some sort of corruption from video games journalism, I do feel like at the end of the day beyond all of the constant abuse, death threats, and blatant misogyny, there's still a discussion to be had about these fucking Youtube celebrities, games journalism ethics and the tendency to create clickbait and gossip over substance, video game developer buddies and their cronies displaying overwhelmingly one demographic, and feminism and how it pertains to games. I feel like at some point when people calm down a middle ground can start to emerge.

 

I'm sorry you don't feel like you're being allowed a voice here on this matter, but I do think it's mistaken to see this drama as the product of two sides that either can end. If #GamerGate didn't attack women (or at least create circumstances within when women can be attacked under the aegis of their movement), there would be no feminist involvement whatsoever. There'd be no need for any. It's only a feminist issue because women and their allies have been repeatedly under attack, by both anonymous trolls and self-appointed faces of the movement.

 

If people want the conversation to move to "ethics," then the easiest way that to happen is #GamerGate working with its critics to identify trolls and end their harassment. But, like some posts in the #GamerGate thread here have shown, many members are afraid that losing the trolls will make their movement weak or even irrelevant. So basically, they're creating and perpetuating the circumstances under which their own movement can't be taken seriously, for which I only have a small amount of sympathy.

 

I don't know, I'm trying to be better about not engaging if I don't have anything to add. It leads to the kind of sickness you're talking about. The Last Night looks cool, but I don't want to support someone who sees themselves as part of the cultural force that created #GamerGate, so I part ways amicably. I don't want anyone feeling alienated by that.

[TychoCelchuuu]

No offense, but some of you guys come across as pretty hostile and condescending.

And Tim comes across as a clueless bigot! If anything justifies hostility and condescension, it's support for #GamerGate. I've had it up to fucking here with the hatred and vitriol and rape and death threats in the gaming community and I'm never, ever going to give a fucking inch on this, even to people who claim to hate harassment and so on out of one side of their mouth even as they cluelessly parrot bullshit #GamerGate talking points out the other side. If this requires hostility and condescension then whatever. Tim has said stuff like "The rules & morals of the real world do not apply to this virtual space," by which he meant video games, and "I also don't buy the patriarchy stuff." Life's too short to pretend like these are anything other than execrable excuses for the unending bullshit that drove Jenn Frank and Mattie Brice out of the industry and that forces people like Danielle and Anita to deal with eternal harassment.

 

You can heap loads of tone policing on me until the cows come home but it's unlikely to change my mind. Enough's fucking enough, and when the gaming community starts to wake up to this and starts to proclaim "gamers are dead," I'm really uninterested in being cordial to someone who doesn't understand anything about linguistics but who feels confident enough to feel personally attacked by "gamers are dead" articles and who thinks a good response to them is something like "You're acting like you want Newspeak and changing / eradicating words to fit your opinions and establish a new truth, your own truth" and who then in the same post proceeds to unilaterally end the conversation (an ironic move in the context of an argument about how nobody can impact discourse in any meaningful way). I mean come the fuck on.