No matter what else happens, because Google exists, the MPAA will work to decimate the company.
That's what they use the law for. To bully and badger that which could replace them. The ratings system keeps indies in check, the ContentID system stagnates new video content, and their fight against torrents goes against their ability to utilize the technology.
They are the Edisons of this Era, working for monopoly rentsover actual innovative progress. That's been their mission with their lobbying power damn near since their inception.
The shareholders are deciding the value of EA? Essentially, EA hedged its bets on strong companies and broke them to chill competition. It's not a surprise that they would work to create a monopoly and destroy features and services that people enjoyed. When all they do is focus on what shareholders want, this is a natural result occurrence from this form of business.
Did the workers have a say in what occurred? No. They became part of the business cycle. They lose money and skills based on money going to the shareholders and the workers having no say in how net profits are allocated.
In the end, then saying that shareholders are happy rings pretty damn hollow when you calculate how much they ruin in the long run. They'll give their CEO a golden parachute while the workers get a small severance and not even a thank you when their time is up.
Thanks EA. You certainly know how to make people feel good about you exploiting the labor of your workers, paying the CEO and shareholders, then pointing the finger at everything that isn't you while you business models parasitically drain the talents of anyone that isn't in marketing or business.
For example, if you beat up or rape some inncoent, do any other charachters in the game try to arrest you or kill you for it, and do you attract enemies as a result
First of all, what in the hell caused you to think the game allows you to rape people?
It's wanton violence, not sexual assault.
Second, there are consequences to your actions as the police come to try to take you down as your wanted meter goes up.
And does doing the right thing, like saving a crime victim, have any kind of reward.
Yes, there's missions outside of the story plot along with other activities that go on besides the world revolving around your actions...
If you have good allies, are they more likely to look out for your back than really evil allies
This is just nonsense. Stop thinking in absolutes.
If so, the game would not only be realistic, but even useful for teaching real life moral lessons.
Great. Now go make that game or mod this one.
But if not, I think it should add that element, so young people are not taught that they can indulge in any mayham they wish without negative consequences arising from it. It would even make for a better game, since being good is sometimes less fun, and even more difficult, and should therefore deserve more rewards and less risk for doing it.
Or maybe you could look at the game and see what people are playing instead of going Professor Umbridge on everyone...
Okay, why do I feel that this is still off somewhat...?
It's like something is missing which I can't quite understand.
I don't know why a retail store is shooting themselves in the foot, but all this would do is push the purchases elsewhere. Why would they do this?
The relationship that they have with digital stores as well as other retail stores means that people that want the game will get it, but unless they're very religious, I don't see a reason to ban the game from their stores and deprive the labor of eight studios practically out of nowhere.
Hmmm.... It seems that market ratings were in control of journalism and people are rejecting it. That may be something to follow up on in regards to actually making better journalistic reporting a reality.
Who wants to control the news, and why? I'd argue that this is a microcosm of events that Techdirt looks at in the macro. We've seen this same corruption in the mainstream media to the point that no one reports much on Google and their complete disregards for the bargaining abilities of workers.
It's not that the police or politicians are turning this into a police state. They put their finger in the air and go where the sentiments take them.
Think about the needs of a community over the needs of someone outside of it. Essentially, on many levels, that's what the fight is about. This lack of understanding is in the media reporting world from Fox to MSNBC to the point that they go to corporate sponsors over something a bit more neutral like BBC.
I'd also say that billionaires buying out news sources helps make this more apparent. If you're owned by someone that doesn't want reporting of fracking, what do you think would be your response if you found out?
Overall, this is a mess that took years to create and may take years to fix. Controlling the narrative in such a way can fail spectacularly once it no longer holds.
That's really the problem with all forms of journalism in general. It seems that we haven't found a way to advance ways to report on the news with media outlets that seem more interested in controlling the facts instead of reporting them.
I believe you should be able to get a lot of news from a lot of sources and come to your own conclusions. Sadly, it seems that other people pick a side and stick to it regardless of how slanted the reporting can be, one way or another.
The hashtag was originally coined by actor Adam Baldwin to refer to allegations (ultimately determined to be false) that gamer developer Zoe Quinn had slept with games journalist Nathan Grayson in return for positive coverage.
1) The hashtag was changed to move away from discussion about Zoe Quinn but she moved to the new one to claim that it was harassment. Before this, people were using Quinngate and Quinnspiracy.
2) It's now been found out that their relationship was far longer than Grayson let be known. Article
3) There's far more to the story than is being told in your argument. Other stories of abuse paint a very negative picture of Zoe to the point that people are misinformed about her background. Issues of bullying and doxxing are alleged and form a picture of someone who abuses people while having no one speak out against such issues.
The issue with TFYC was that her "fight" with them lead to doxxing of one individual that she endorsed while also ensuring that her abusive behavior was not told to the general public.
The main problems with Quinn were 4 main issues: Her interaction with Wizardchan, her interaction with TFYC, the blog post by Erin, and the relationship with a "journalist"
With Wizardchan, she abused a forum for social awkward people just to have her game put on Steam. That abuse wasn't reported because of her connections to game journalists.
For TFYC, they tried to reason and negotiate with her and with evidence, it was found that she doxxed one member.
But the major points are she DDoS’d our site, she called us exploitative, and her PR manager Maya Felix Kramer posted my Facebook information which Zoe replied to, alerting her followers. Due to this, I received a death threat. My name Matthew Rappard does not appear on the current site or the previous site for TFYC, and I would have preferred to be a silent partner. This Twitter retweeting went on for almost 24 hours, most of them calling us transphobic and exploitative.
With no one talking about this, a LOT of gamers were upset at this behavior. Just for perspective, when gamers saw Alison Theus needed surgery, they came together to help Extra Credits by paying for that, and seeing her bully this donation site with no one reporting on it in the industry got a lot of people riled up.
But adding to this was the last two.
The blog post, I've not read. I came in when censorship on Youtube was a thing and I took it that what it said was pretty valid given how she tried to silence the topic. But the final straw and what everyone was upset about was the relationship.
I know a lot of people talk about some sort of review, but that's rather disingenuous. He didn't review her game but what DID happen was that people saw him giving her game preferential treatment (if you look at some of the research, I think it was the fact that he used language of Zoe's as well as put her game screen as the background over any of the other 50 games so DQ made more of an impression).
Those are the main 4 contentions in THAT part of the story from a journalistic perspective.
It still doesn't explain why there was no gamergate/notyourshield movement until a chick was at the crux of an incident of (mis)perceived corruption.
Well, as people were looking into that story, 14 articles came out declaring that gamers were dead. Source
What isn't mentioned is that people supportive were pushed out of even chronicling the story from Wikipedia or the doxxing and harassment coming out.
For Gamergate, it started when those articles came out. For NYS, that came about because a lot of journalists wanted to claim minority support to hide their unethical practices. Hence, the term.
That's why so many people are focused on the journalists. ZQ hasn't been relevant to the conversation since those articles came out. But people keep wanting to talk about her instead of the unethical issues unearth through that controversy as well as others that have arisen from agenda driven journalism.
I'm an AVID gamer, and I'd never heard of either Zoe Quinn or the FYC before this stupid "controversy" broke out. None of this matters. It's not worth the bandwidth the story would take up.
Then you aren't trying to report with full context. That's on you and your decision. But obviously, it was important to enough people to look into those aspects of the story and uncover what wasn't being told by gaming journalists.
Both are public forums. This bullshit about demanding that independent media outlets cover according to your demands is insane.
If you say so.
All I did was point out three parts of the story going missing. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and all you're doing is saying that it's about women's critiques and other nonsense while ignoring anything that doesn't fit your bias.
Also, a chat box isn't really the best area for a everything when there's other ways to tell the story.
Who do you people THINK you are?
I dunno, maybe people upset that gaming publications decided to pull a Jack Thompson on us, declare us dead and move on as if that crap was kosher?
Just a thought...
It also represents a big fat nothing with regard to the larger "controversy" GamerGate portends to be about. You people are all over the map, which is what I've been saying all along.
Well at least you're not claiming it's a right wing movement anymore...
Your movement was hijacked from its onset, it has no clear and concise complaint, it often makes accusations that turn out to be blatant falsehoods, and it has allowed itself to be characterized by some of the most vile human shitheads I've ever heard about who think it's fun to threaten death and rape upon people who don't deserve it.
Ah yes, ignore how they condemn such threats and ignore what I've just pointed out about third parties in other comments, right?
So's the journalism.
and it was NOT broken from the outside
Right, because journalists that try to claim that the public is entitles is so much better?
so start it anew
You missed the sites that have already popped up with better reporting.
make it make sense
Or you could just stop ignoring things you don't like. ;)
stop bitching about tiny little sub-issues that don't mean anything in the larger context
Sorry, but you have no control over those people and what they are looking for in reporting. Neither do I. What's small to you may be large to someone else. It's a collective of people organized into a number of things where ideas matter over who's in charge. They seem to have found a lot to do and they're still doing more. I guess watching the movement, we'll see where the ride ends.
stop with the petulant demand that major and minor media outlets cover every story you seem to think is worth covering
I didn't demand a damn thing from you. I just said you decided not to report on it. And you said that in chat. I accepted that you didn't want to report on it after our discussions and I'm not going to tell you a thing. But I WILL call out the contradictions just as I've done for years on this site in regards to copyright maximalism and treat this as I do any other person opposed to my viewpoint. You decided to talk about this and I just pointed out the issues. You can agree or disagree but the emotions flowing out don't matter to me. Decide whatever you want to report on.
I am not here to tell you what to do. But just like others here, I call out things that contradict what you say.
--but what you're talking about with the Zoe Quinn "scandal" is akin to the airplane being on fire and you're insisting we all talk about how it's made the soda cans too hot to drink.
You brought it up dude. That hasn't been the topic since it broke and the censorship made it larger.
By the way, censorship by DMCA started this ball rolling.
Censorship on Reddit got a lot more people involved. Welcome to the aftermarket of the Streisand Effect.
Why do you think there's only two sides to the argument?
There's been evidence that trolls have been riling up and doxxing people on both sides of the issue. That's a third party just looking to cause conflict, namely that one of Anita's recent discussions was prevented because of a really crazy troll from Something Awful.
Hell, did anyone talk about how there's a reward for the capture of the perp? Link
When you have a number of people in a revolt this size, you're going to have outliers. Regardless, you can't just claim that everything is one way or another. Sometimes, you have to rake the much and look for what the truth actually is.
There's been rational debate and discussion trying to occur, but you won't have it if the only thing you focus on is the death threats and ignore the real issues.
What people are upset about is how incredibly corrupted that game journalism has become. It was a problem seen for a long time and gamers have had to fight back against corrupt journalists. This isn't even the first time.
They did it with the Mass Effect 3 ending which was Bioware making a poor ending and hiding behind Jennifer Halperin for it. They spoke up, EA tried to close down conversation and it got larger.
Same thing with Adam Orth and his claims about the XB1 which people were upset about.
Hell, you can go back and see a lot more issues such as the Microsoft/Youtuber deal and see how they were upset with Youtubers on that.
It happens. People respond to incentives and the perverse incentive here is that some people troll. You have to deal with that while moving on with the conversation about how to end the corruption.
Escapist's reforms are a decent start but more people should want to do it. That's far more than trying to shut down a conversation because one person got a death threat when others have condemned it.