The fact of the matter is GoG used a screenshot from the game of a tombstone located in the toxic dump labeled "Games Journalism" with the date that a number of journalists banded together publishing a series of articles vilifying the "typical gamer" known collectively as the "Gamers are Dead" articles. This date has nothing directly to do with Gamergate itself. The only connection to Gamergate is that it became one of the major talking points regarding gaming journalists portraying their "agendas".

If games journalists are so upset over the mere mention of that date, that tells you how out to lunch they were when they wrote those vile hit pieces. The way they try to shift the story to something else speaks volumes. Sadly, GoG caved in to their horse-and-pony show.

On the face of it, it's not even clear what Running With Scissors even means by that tombstone. They did locate it in the toxic dump after all as opposed to the graveyard. Is it there because they think game journalism deserves to be in the toxic dump, or that the entire affair belongs there?

At the end of the day, those games journalists made a choice when they published those stories on the same day. They did it, and they need to reap the after-effects. Gamergate and GoG are not to blame for the controversy around their own actions.

While i understand your concern. The term SJW has it's valid use in this discussion as it's not just simply something you call people you don't agree with but describes people with certain characteristics and behaviors.

Most people here used it with valid arguments so I don't think there's any case to be alarmed at your part.

I disagree, it's not an issue of Gamergate, of Gamers or even fandom in general, it's an issue of Internet; and it was greatly exacerbated in recent years thanks to social media.

Lots of peoples are assholes on the Internet period! or to be more accurate assholes tends to get more visible and be more extroverted on the Net than they would be in "real life".

Post anything even remotely controversial and you will end up with insults, potentially death threats, etc... and yes if you happen to be a woman or part of whatever minority then those insults will probably end up being sexists, racists, etc...

I am sure that if some woman post an article/video titled "The problematic sexism in Winnie the Pooh" on the Net you don't need to be a genius or a Publitzer prize winner to know that she will probably end up getting thousands of sexists insults, death threats, etc... but that doesn't necessarily mean that the Winnie the Pooh community, or anybody criticizing said article, is toxic, inherently sexists or a woman hating manchildren ; it is just a negative side effect of the Internet freedom and anonymity.

That's why for me the "reaction" to Gamergate (or the Ghostbuster reboot, or TLJ, or...) by most of the press and others was both ridiculous and dishonest, yes they are persons who were harassed, yes most of them probably received death threats and yes it's perfectly normal to denounce this harassment with the strongest words, but to take that as a proof that the gamer community was full of evil misogynist or to think that a silly Twitter hashtag (that anybody and their dog can use anytime for whatever use they want) could somehow, magically, become a highly organized hate movement, is beyond stupid.

And the worse is that I am pretty sure that most of those who gleefully reported on it were perfectly aware of that but they were just way too happy to finally have a name to put on their boogeyman, something to point fingers at and blame for everything bad happening for years to come. (not to mention all the extra clicks)


And for me personally this comment is a perfect example of the issue : a couple of posters on Gog does XYZ on a heated thread... and it become a perfect "representation" of gamers (to some extend) and of some Twitter hashtag users.

Of course it has nothing to do with the fact that peoples with "strong opinions" are usually the most visible; that on this kind of controversial threads more "moderate" peoples usually lose interest and only the more "extreme on both sides remains and post regularly; that there is some "history" between some posters who tends to be more aggressive when certain individuals are involved, etc...etc...but of course not... instead it is of course a representations of thousands of others who probably never heard that this thread or forum even exists...

Perfect Summation and i agree in totality

First of all, i can't help but notice that your preaching while polite goes in one direction only, at the bottom line all that is left is another "gamergaters don't want diversity!" rant.

I wonder, where exactly is that "diversity" you're speaking of, i by no means am able to see it in a world where it has become normal to openly and publicly and with great appreciation from a group (which i'm not allowed to name according to the last mod post, so much for free speech, thanks) attack entire groups of people on the basis of (what CDPR claims to denounce according to their apology) hate.

Unless you're deliberately turning a blind eye there is absolutely no way whatsoever you have not noticed what has become a...."trend", to bash especially "white" people and men, and we are not talking about some "dark side" of the internet here, major news publications literally publish articles frequently telling their readers how "white" people are trash how men are all sexist scum, how masculinty needs to die (if i where to go to Twitter and post "All white people are scum" i'd have a couple hundred likes within minutes).....etc....etc.....etc... and all that other nonsense.

And it doesn't even end there, if someone who does not belong to the hated group and DARES disagree with the hate, like "blacks" or women, what happens? They get called "Coons" they get called "treacherous cunts" by the very same group (again which i'm not allowed to name) that claims to champion.......a certain "justice" (Dodge increased to 100).

And it still doesn't end there, because this behaviour not only remains largely unchallegend it get's supported, be it social media platforms themselves who choose not to enforce their own community guidelines on these people, the media, celebrities, whatever.

This is the diversity of today you're talking about yes? Can you see why i and a lot of people take issues when they hear the word "Diversity" especially when it's used as a justification for something we happen to disagree with in regards to something we cherish,like, games?

As far as gamergate goes, until about 2 years ago i didn't even know about it and when i stumbled across it i actually had to laugh, "sexist"?, "women haters"?, "alt-right? "White supremacist"? "Nazis"? (I'm austrian, that fact alone makes you get called a "nazi" all over the world and you become immune over the decades)
They even went as far as to claim they are "murderers", and all that , mind you,coming from people (gaming journalists, developers) of which some turned later out to be actual criminals, namely, sexual predators, the blatant irony of this fact alone is hilarious.

And that's when i stopped giving a single fuck about gaming "journalism", does that make me a "gamergater"? I'm sure it does in the eyes of the "group that shall not be named".

Another point I'd like to make to the staff at GOG is that this can't be good for office morale. When that joke was posted on Twitter it was obviously tongue and cheek and done in good humor.

Now that you've removed the joke and issued an apology, you have forever changed the atmosphere in your own work environment. You have made it a crime to tell jokes now.

You guys had no way on knowing that it was going to offend someone, because you wouldn't have posted it to begin with if you did. But the thing is you're never going to know. All jokes carry that risk.

So to ensure that you don't offend anyone else or start another drama storm would be to remove humor all together from the office's you guys work in.

Is that a trade you guys really want to make?

One of the best things about GOG is that it feels far more human and less robotic then other corporations. From the support staff to the mods on the forums, you get a sense that you're talking to a human being and not some brainless automaton that you'd find working for EA or something. Self censorship will get you closer to the EA's way of thinking.

For example: "beep boop to all staff in the products department, be sure not to post jokes on social media or have any fun. Someone somewhere might get offended there for... fun and humor is forbidden beep boop"

In short please don't allow yourselves to be another empty shell of a corporation. Keep your staff happy, your paying, and don't concern yourselves with the opinions of the sheep.

Why did gog give in to pressure from a tiny minority of people who have no power in real life ?

Should have never deleted the tweet. It was factual and truthful.

Never bow down to twitter trolls and SJW feminists.

Who keeps down voting all these comments. I'm generally curious.

The silent majority?

This is true, 'diversity' these days is too often thinly veiled racism and sexism, or used as a sloppy weapon against meritocracy and free competition. Back in my day growing up we had no racism or sexism(however there was a lot of homophobia; we have made progress there, though unfortunately now we seem to have overcorrected a bit with that), but here we are, having lost all the progress we once made.


For the people wanting to 'change' gaming: why is it surprising that there would be a general pushback against people uninterested in the hobby trying to interfere in that hobby? With just a bit of research on these journalists, which is easy since they're quite public about their bias, you can see their views. I don't know how they managed to get into the gaming industry when they hate games so much. Imagine if I said we need to change romance novels because they're sexist against men and portray men in an unrealistic way, and did a bunch of reviews and blogs about how problematic they are; those novels aren't marketed towards me. It's okay if people enjoy different things to me. Stop trying to force people to do things and let people buy and support what they like. If there's enough of a market for more diverse games, those games will succeed on their own. Scantily clad women in gaming is okay! Fully clad women in gaming is okay! Men saving women in gaming is okay! Women saving men in gaming is okay! Etc, etc; it just depends on the target demographic that's actually going to pay to support the game, and what they enjoy.

That's quite the claim. Perhaps what you mean is "growing up I wasn't aware of any racism or sexism"? I'd put money on the latter - generally you tend to either filter things out or just not see things that don't relate to you personally.

Perfectly true one. I had an amazingly diverse group of friends from all races and genders, it wasn't a big deal, we didn't even see ourselves as being any different based on our heritage. We just enjoyed each other's company, we were just people, friends, it didn't matter what we looked like. We didn't try to change each other, there was just acceptance and valuing each person's individuality. The color of our skin was irrelevant in class, only our ability mattered. That was true, natural diversity; not the twisted mutated divisive version of it being used to try and take down free society these days.

This. I think a defining moment where I realized how much I despised far left wing regressives, SJWs or whatever you want to call them, was when they started claiming that living "color-blind" was a form of racism and that black people couldn't be racist because they'd now redefined the word to "power + privilege".

You'll have to point that out to me because I can't see that

I was actually trying to say the opposite although I will admit I was tired, it was after midnight and I'm not the most concise person to start with
This is very true