10 thoughts on “#Gamergate”

  1. Not a problem. They don’t need consumers. They’ll just get tax money to keep them afloat because their ideology must win. Men would push back so they have to make sure there are none left.

  2. I think the “social justice warrior” thing is just status signalling – “I’m so awesome that I can have this belief system”. That would be great, if it were your customers doing it since they’ll spend more money with businesses that cater to their signaling needs. But it’s terrible when a business does it at the expense of their customers. Well, maybe the survivors will have a greater appreciation for their audience.

  3. It’s almost as though the left are trying to see just how much they can alienate young voters before the next election.

    Personally, I don’t really care what big game developers do, because they mostly just seem to churn out cookie-cutter crap these days. I’ve had far more fun playing Goat Simulator than most ‘AAA’ games I’ve tried in the last few years.

      1. But does it do goats? Neatly grazed hedges are as important to a peoples’ spirit as being able to kill many times your weight in orcs.

      2. According to whom, the journalists who may have a conflict of interest or from other gamers who’ve had a chance to evaluate the game?

    1. If you’re looking for unique, check out Kerbal Space Program, which is being put together (after 3 years, still in Alpha!) by a Mexican indie company and a huge community of modders (along with a small bit of assistance from NASA for the asteroid retrieval part of the game). Seriously addictive, and the nerd meter goes to 11.

  4. Ran across some similar news for Facebook. Some background here: Facebook has a “real name policy” (which has been discussed here before I think) where people are supposed to use their real legal names for personal Facebook webpages. I believe the primary reason is that it makes Facebook’s data mining and ad targeting easier, but Facebook’s justification is to prevent things like anonymous trolling or bullying.

    The leadership of Facebook also are a bunch of liberal bigots. For a glaring example, a Texas cheerleader, Kendall Jones had posted hunting pictures (where she posed by big game she had shot herself in Africa and perhaps elsewhere). Needless to say, these pictures caused an uproar with among other things, a “Kill Kendall Jones” webpage appearing. Facebook originally ruled that Kendall’s page violated “community standards” (animal cruelty, which apparently is not a problem for other hunting-topic Facebook pages which have similar hunting trophy poses) but not the “Kill Kendall Jones” page. The “Kill Kendall Jones” page was removed the next day under considerable public protest.

    Anyway, a lot of drag queen performers and many other members of the LGBT community had created Facebook accounts under stage names and other assumed names. A persistent “vigilante” recently rooted out hundreds to thousands of these names and outed them to Facebook’s administrative staff who originally removed all these pages. End result is that suddenly Facebook has changed its policy to include “chosen names”, that is, nicknames and aliases that the above people use in real life.

    A theory that I favor is the vigilante was a victim of Facebook’s real name policy. He then struck back by targeting a group that frequently uses assumed names, is politically powerful, and to which Facebook, due to its liberal leanings, wasn’t going to ignore.

Comments are closed.