On one hand, upper management has actually treated us very well. They have allowed us more room to discuss the issue (Even more so than 4chan, even) than practically any other big site out there. Sure, I imagine the entire conversation is heavily moderated, but at least we're not being outright censored.
Actual, Escapist contributors, on the other hand, have been just as bad as everyone else at trying to make the issue out to be something it's not. I think I've already gone into why I had no respect for Jim Sterling's opinion on the matter (In short, I feel he didn't do enough research into why people are upset.) And the rumor that he had a hand in preventing pro gamergate comments from making it into this article has not improved my opinion of him. So let's start with the female indie dev list.
Publisher's Note: The female game developer who authored the introduction and collected these essays has many years of experience working in game development. She has shared these essays with The Escapist on condition that her name, and those of her essayists, be kept anonymous. At the request of the author, comments for this article have been left open as one of the main elements of the GamerGate controversy is never allowing debate. To ensure a reasonable discussion, this thread will receive the same heightened moderation that our other GamerGate threads have."
I remember that the one comment I ever made on an Escapist article was deleted. It was about how I thought Sarkeesian faked that threat against her. This should give you a pretty good idea of what these people are like: You won't be allowed to speculate without hard, video game journalist approved facts. If you consider Anita, Quinn, or anyone else in their circle a terrible person, for whatever reason, your comment will be seen as hate speech, and will be promptly deleted. Remember, a huge part of what makes Gamergate what it is is the stripping away the right to criticize talents in the industry.
I also like how the woman who collected these essays requested all of the women to be anonymous, including herself. I know people in the anti gamergate community have been preaching the idea that this was done to 'protect the innocent women!!!' and have been spreading around the article as if it proved such. But if you actually look into the situation, or, maybe, even read the article thoroughly, you'll see that this argument makes no sense.
I was asked by The Escapist to participate in interviews about #GamerGate, as a female game developer. It's such a contentious subject that even balanced questions can seem skewed. Moreover, I felt like the questions didn't really get at any of the things I wanted to say. I suggested instead that women in the industry provide statements, so we could speak about the aspects of the situation that are important to each of us. What we chose to cover in our statements would say a lot about how #GamerGate impacts us.
To be fair, I'm sure being called out on being corrupt can be very stressful.
I asked a variety of women to participate. The only thing they have in common is that they have years of game development experience (most with 10 years or more in the industry). A few I know well, but most of them are casual acquaintances at best. There was no discussion before they wrote the statements: I asked if they would be willing to participate, they said yes, I sent the talking points, and then they sent the statements. They are running here intact, unedited.
I made it clear up-front that the women would be anonymous. It was the only way many of them would participate. I know there are women in this group, including me, who chafe at the idea that we can't attach our names to our statements. We know the consequences, however: whatever the source, the result is almost always harassment of one type or another, sometimes severe and sometimes affecting your family. Once several women requested to be anonymous, all were made anonymous so there could be no links to trace between them.
Oh, wow. They outright admit it this was out of a desire not to be traced. They're slipping!
The thing about this is, when she says 'harassment' what she means is 'criticism.' She absolutely does not want people to take it upon themselves to investigate what is being said here for themselves, and then start asking questions. I've looked through it all already, and I can already tell you that a lot of what is being said here is nonsense.
What do you think about the term "gamer?" and about #GamerGate? What you think about the press and any corruption you think occurs? Should controversial games be available (whether that controversy comes from content like rape or a strong "social agenda")? Do you feel like "social issues" or pressure have changed your personal work or your work for an employer, and if so, in what way? Has #GamerGate affected you personally or professionally--has it changed the way you feel about your games, your audience, or your work?
I'm sure this will be fun.
GamerGate' - that's a loaded term. So is 'Social Justice Warrior,' 'Men's Rights Activists,' 'gamer' and even 'I'm a woman.' This past month has been frustrating for most people, exhausting for many and downright hellish and terrifying for some.
I frankly don't care if you want to call yourself a 'gamer' as long as you act like a decent human being. If you are a #GamerGate proponent then you need to realize that the hashtag was started by a small fringe group as a PR tactic to try and divert the attention they were getting for their inexcusable behavior. If you want to scream at the top of your lungs to call out the alleged inappropriate behavior of game developers, publishers or journalists then you should be doing the same towards your fellow GamerGaters who continue to derail any useful conversations through their harassment, abuse and hate speech.
I... What? 'Divert attention away from inexcusable behavior...' You know, I think we've been getting a lot of those self projection type comments a lot in the past few days. It's honestly kind of surprising to me. A part of me hopes that these people, at some level, realize what they're doing is wrong.
And by the way, I'm pretty sure the wider GamerGate community absolutely condemns real abuse, harassment, and hate speech. After Brianna Wu, we've even taken steps to start distancing ourselves from those sort of people. We absolutely do NOT condone harassment. It was never about that.
However, the biggest issue I have surrounding everything from this last month is the amount of people who have diverted the discussion from this blatant gendered harassment. Whether or not you agree that corruption in the games press merits discussion the focus was and should be on the constant and vicious abuse directed at women, minorities and the allies who support them.
Not Your Shield. I really don't think I need to go into a more detail here about what happened with that, and how the press is pretending it never happened in order to suit their agenda. Also, the guy who made that tag got fired. It's almost like Gamer Gate supporters are being harassed more than the people making a living off of claiming to be oppressed!
It is this constant onslaught of attacks and hatred that has caused both "sides" to begin to escalate matters resulting in inappropriate comments, lost tempers and some really great people leaving the game industry. Let's go ahead and have the discussion on corruption in the press, but let's not do so by sweeping the discussions about harassment and hate mobs under the rug.
Yeah, I remember Quinn saying something similar in her Cracked article. And again, I have to ask... WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE? No one high profile has left the industry. (Unless you count Phil Fish, but he quit the industry like, five times last year.) No, the real talent is sticking with gaming, thank you.
No one is trying to 'destroy games' or take away 'hardcore games' or tell anyone what games they should or should not play. No one is trying to say that the 'male video game culture' has to die. What they are saying is that the current culture and ecosystem surrounding games has some toxic and unwelcoming areas and THAT needs to change.
That toxic and unwelcome culture...? The indie scene! Again, the sheer amount of projection in this article is absolutely staggering. Also... are you really suggesting that the 'gamers are dead' articles never happened? Come on, now. The entire theme of those articles is that white, male gamers needed to be torn down to allow women and minorities to take over.
What many are also saying, and what I wish was considered 'obvious' to everyone, is that having a more diverse group of game developers creating a more diverse set of games played by a more diverse set of players is good for everyone in the industry. It keeps this industry sustainable and creates an environment that allows creative, engaging games of all types to be made so that everyone can experience the joys of playing video games.
This past month has been one big #1reasonwhy moment after another. The standing up of many to condemn the horrific (and sometimes illegal) activities of a few has also given some of us our #1reasontobe. Discuss the side issues all you want, but we need to focus on and continue our efforts to foster a culture that will not tolerate the tactics used this past month. #1reasonwhy needs to be a thing of the past and we can't rest until it is.
... Is that yet another counter gamergate hashtag? I hadn't heard of this one. Anyway, there's not really much else to say here. Sure, she does some more self projecting, and I don't like how she thinks having a diverse team is inherently tied to making quality titles, but nothing really I want to go into depth about.
Oh yeah. And there's an editor's note at the bottom of each page, warning people to not be bullies. Seriously, fuck these people.
When I was asked to write a statement on #GamerGate, it took some time to organize my thoughts because I've been neck-deep in it for a month now. We all have. Before I talk about how it affected me personally, however, I want to take a moment to speak directly to those who support it:
I'm a player. I love games as much as you do -- maybe more, considering what I've been willing to give up to have this as a career. Let me be blunt, from one player to another. You're damaging this thing we both love: games. Here's why.
Developers play and are influenced by all sorts of games. That killer new feature for Call of Duty may have been inspired by something a designer saw in a Facebook game. That awesome ragdoll technique that makes each death spectacular in GTA might have come from a GDC talk given by a female indie who developed it as a part of a horse-riding sim. The shader technique that beautifully illuminates the interior halls of the next Halo might have been created for a tiny indie game about mental illness.
Um. No they weren't.
You know, I think these indie scene girls are way, way too arrogant for their own good. This is absolutely a ridiculous claim to make. The big budget scene doesn't care what the indie guys do, because they have money to burn.
Losing the weird, polarizing, indie voices from game development means losing variety, which in turn means fewer new ideas circulating. This means the games you actually do love and want to play become stagnant and dull. It means more sequels where the only new feature is a few more polygons and larger textures. It means some of the talented men and women who work on the games you actually do play may also no longer be a part of the industry.
I'm pretty sure Nintendo has generally been very good at making sequels, years before the indie scene became a thing. Like I said before, what you're saying is nonsense.
The more you yell, the more you search Twitter and leap into un-tagged conversations to argue, the more you create pastebins of personal information, the more you attack our colleagues, the more game developers will stop listening to you. The more you're seen as a hate mob, the more developers will tune you out. You've seen some developers you probably respect standing up against the harassment and against the hate. More will follow if you persist, and the lines between the camps will grow deeper.
Like who? Tim Schafer? Don't make me laugh. I lost respect for him due to his actions over the past two months. What, with scamming people on Kickstarter again, his ridiculous fight with JonTron...
More important, though, if game development is a terrible place to work, more of us will stop doing it -- and that goes for both men and women. Having angry people arguing with you all the time on Twitter and knowing that speaking out gets you on the harassment radar makes it easy to quit a line of work that's already challenging. And you don't want any of us to quit, even the ones who make games you think are awful, because you never know where those breakthroughs that improve games are going to come from. Remember: Minecraft started as an indie game.
Again with this bizarre claim. "We'll stop making games you don't care about!"
These tiny indie games and indie developers are no threat to you or to AAA games, regardless of their point of view. Neither are the media sites that cover them. If you don't want to play their games, don't play them. If you don't want to read diversity articles, don't go to those sites. Let them have their space. Let them develop games you think are stupid or terrible. Let them speak and just ignore it. It doesn't have to be a part of your life -- the player's life -- for it to be a part of the game development ecology.
Again, I have to stress how we, as a group of individuals, are not allowed to dismiss their analysis of game design. To them, it doesn't matter that their arguments are weak.
So if you truly love games, please take a minute to contemplate the fact that you are attacking the people that make them. You are actively playing a role that makes it more challenging for them to make games. You are, in the end, building a dark and dull future for the games you love.
Why do I say this has the potential to do great damage to game development -- and thus games? Playing a game is all about imagining yourself in a different world. Take a minute now to do that. Step into my shoes. You're a woman who makes games. You've worked hard for many years to build a name and reputation for yourself and your work.
You sit down to express -- at last -- all your thoughts on #GamerGate. You haven't been able to speak about it publicly for lots of reasons, even though you wanted to. This is your chance. "In my 18 years working as a character artist for fighting games," you begin, and you pause. You start to count: how many female character artists in fighting games have 18 years of experience? You can only think of one, and she's purposely stayed away from #GamerGate. That's too identifiable.
It's not that you're ashamed of what you're about to type. You want to talk about it on Twitter and Facebook and you want to agree to interview requests... but you can't. You've seen what happens when women speak out on #GamerGate or even just about being a woman in game development. Attaching your name would also attach your company name. You know the consequences -- once a company or person is on the radar of certain groups, it's on the radar for years. It won't end when #GamerGate blows over. The consequences are longer term than that.
Yeah, I've seen what happens when people like C.H. Sommers, the women of GamerGate, and other minority groups speak out about GamerGate: They get fucking applauded. The problem isn't your gender. The problem is that the group you support is toxic. It's hurting the industry, trying to give us all a bad name, all so a select few can profit. Again, I have to stress that criticizing an idea isn't harassment.
You spend a couple days thinking about what you'll say. There are the easy parts, sure. #GamerGate started with harassment and outrage because a female developer had affairs and some of the people happened to also be involved in the industry. It was clearly because she's a woman and one who had a history of being targeted -- once you're on the radar, you're on it for years. You can also say in many years of game development, you've seen a bunch of sex scandals go public including affairs, wife swapping, strippers in the office and even sex in the office during work hours, and none of them got any significant attention. The only difference here was the gender of the actor in question (female) and the fact that she was already on their radar (largely for being female and outspoken).
Yeah, If you're reading this blog, chances are you already know that a lot of this is bullshit. We've been calling out dudes a lot lately, for example... Ben Kuchera is one of the symbols of the anti movement. And no, Quinn, from what I understand, got under people's skins because her 'outspoken' opinions were completely ridiculous. What happened between her and TFYC is a pretty good example of what she's like.
You can say that's the root for a fact because you've watched the whole thing unfold as it happened. You can also say that as a fact because of the choice of targets. In an industry where large publishers routinely send valuable swag to journalists and hold huge, boozy parties at every conference, the targets here are small and indie. They have one thing in common: they're run by women, or they favorably cover the issues of women in games.
You decide instead to talk about the reality of how games are developed. Indies make whatever they want, so the question is really about mainstream development. Does social pressure change the content you make? Ultimately, you make what your bosses tell you to make. Commercial game development is a complex machine, largely driven by marketing and PR. It's all about what will sell. Half-naked ladies in games are safe -- those games sell, and if it sells it will get made. If changes happen, like having more female protagonists or avoiding some of the "tropes" in the Sarkeesian videos, it's for one of two reasons (or both): Because marketing believes it will sell more games, or because marketing believes it will put the company in a better light, which will sell more games.
You've never had your artistic freedom trampled in your work because there's no such thing as artistic freedom in your work if it's work done for a company. You're there to make the game they pay you to make. They tell you all the time that the shade of green is not right, that the animation is too sexy or not sexy enough, that the character needs more or less clothes, that the blood isn't shiny enough. It's a part of the job: that's the reality of game development.
You keep thinking about the topic over the next day, as you watch a friend respond to the hate. At this point, you can't call it anything else. She stood up for Sarkeesian and now she's become a target, too. Her public face is unshakable, resolute, but the face you see is broken. She's questioning this as a career. She's frightened for her children because she has seen the threats others have gotten. She asks you, point blank, why she should keep making games -- why she puts up with this just to pay her rent. Why shouldn't she just find another job?
Yeah, that's a really good question... why DON'T these people find other jobs? If the industry is so 'toxic' why do you still work in it?
It can't be a passion for the craft... people like Quinn can barely even program, let alone make a compelling product. It's because that they know, right know, that the gaming scene is THE place to make money off of their brand of feminism.
In a weird way, that mirrors your personal feelings on #GamerGate: this is a business, all of it. It's an open marketplace. If you don't like a website, go to another. If you don't like a game, don't buy it. Sure, you can also yell about it and boycott. But a game owes you, personally, absolutely nothing. A website owes you nothing. You have no "right" to either. You have the right and the ability to vote with your clicks and your dollars.
All of these thoughts are going through your head as the situation escalates. You try to talk about it a little without the #GamerGate hashtag, and even so you immediately get accusatory responses on Twitter. Harassment against women in game development doesn't exist, they say -- where is your evidence? No, your personal experience and the experience of your friends isn't evidence. How can you say this started as misogyny? It's not about misogyny -- it's about corruption in the media. Now there are are six more people piling onto this thread and one just won't stop so you block him. "Censorship!" they cry. Then there are three more people digging up tweets from two years ago and using them as "evidence" that you're an "SJW." How did this go from making a comment to a friend about Sarkeesian to having random people arguing with you? Are there actually #GamerGate supporters actively scouring Twitter using searches to argue with people who aren't even using the hashtag? Yes, there are -- it happens to the extent that you decide to stop talking about it even with friends on Twitter because your feed gets flooded with people looking for a fight. You realize, after a few hours, that you have effectively been silenced
The thing about this passage is that, we, as a movement, have more than enough reason to doubt that these people are honest. For example, there are plenty of women in GamerGate who will tell you that the gaming industry isn't inherently misogynistic. How were these people treated, again....? Oh that's right. They were ignored, because they don't fit their narrative. You're being criticized for unfairly judging a community for your own gain. There's really nothing more to it than that.
And now you're past the deadline and you realize you can't avoid it anymore. You have to write your statement about #GamerGate. You decide not to write about your feelings or your take on #GamerGate, but instead to write directly to the player reading this article:
If you truly love games, please take a minute to contemplate the fact that you are attacking the people that make them. You are actively playing a role that makes it more challenging for them to make games. You are, in the end, building a dark and dull future for the games you love.
I seriously doubt that. Now, on to anonymous indie developer number 3.
The term gamer seems to be as varied in definition as "art", in that no one can quite agree how it should be defined but a great many people have opinions on it. Mine is that anyone who plays games is a "gamer", which is broader than most. Maybe that's because when I was younger I never felt like a "real" gamer, even though I've been playing games since the day my dad brought home the TI-99 or the Apple ][e. I can't put my finger on exactly why; I guess it was always the silent accusation of being a fake geek girl, because for various reasons I wasn't hardcore enough.
One paragraph in and I am almost immediately convinced that this was written by Leigh Alexander. Haha. Maybe not, but she is known for having a unhealthy fixation on her childhood.
I think #GamerGate is a colossal mess. It started with terrible origins and gained some legitimate followers with decent intentions, but those will never be taken seriously because the hashtag is irrevocably tainted with the misogyny and malice of those who formed it and the fact that those who still hold it up and insist that that isn't what it stands for is baffling to me. You can say all you want that this isn't what your movement stands for, but that is what it was birthed in, and the people who are spewing hatred and threatening violence are raising your banner and marching behind it when they take the battlefield. They might be the minority (which, how do you even prove that?) but their voices are the loudest. And what was with the endless harassment of Zoe and Anita to "prove" that the former actually gave to charity, and the latter actually filed the police report? When both women's actions were substantiated, were any apologies issued for the endless haranguing? Being a woman on the internet, silently observing this abuse, has been endlessly depressing.
The funny thing about this is that Milo did apologize for accusing Anita about that. Oops.
Anyway, There's a lot more wrong with this. I've been seeing a lot of comments about how GamerGate 'can't be taken seriously' because of it's origins as a sex scandal, and I can't really wrap my head around that. Do all of these articles being written trying to slander us mean nothing to you?
