This is the worlds smallest violin playing the worlds saddest song.

Yeah much terrorism, such wow. GG was perfectly reasonable and the only reason you and other people on this forum dislike it is because you don't support creative freedom and fell for the misinformation that so called journalists spread about it. As to your own conspiracy theories and reading between the lines, I really have read more than enough to stop caring because you can't see any perspective other than your own as correct and can't even consider that you might be wrong and was misled.

I don't really know the impact of what he did, and I doubt this forum is the place to find out, so I'll bow out and let all you perfectly sane people throw playground insults at Trumpey-poo. Goodbye on that front.

One more...

Games would be called RPG with no RP element in it just because you can increase your Strength.

Related:

Games like Secret of Mana, which have the basic gameplay of action games, would be called RPGs.

Gamers Gate was only in favor of creative freedom as long as you made the games they wanted to have, created by the right people.

you do remember the rants about certain games, petitions of keeping people away from development, rants about specific developers. boycotting of developers and games and so on. what about their creative freedom?

Again with the laughs.So,it's okay to pay blackmail money like Obama did? ''Here,you go little ayatollah have this plane full of money and be a good little fella and don't play with nukes.'' THANKS for the LAUGHS.

deleted

Gamergate*

And no, ranting against a game =/= not wanting the creators to make it. Regardless of what individual people though about it, the movement itself never did anything via ops against anyone's creative freedom. I know the rants, but I don't know the petitions you speak of, and there was no movement wide boycott, only people who hated some games and wanted them to fail, no action was done to make sure of it, which was the correct choice.

GG as a whole was ''keep shit you like to yourself and don't impose it on others''. Whether you believe GG to be that or not, the non-GG / anti-GG side was the opposite of that, as can be seen by their constant whining, even on this forum, about how and why developers should make games as per their instructions.

You should have told that to your peeps back when they went batshit insane over Dead or Alive Extreme 3. And that shit was even just in anticipation of hypothetical rants. Actually, you should have told that to your peeps every time they attacked a journalist for criticizing certain aspects of games. Because of course criticism was characterised as straight up censorship by the gamergate folks all the time.

Back then, you justified your contradictory stance by simply declaring some forms of criticism invalid altogether. Besides criticism of representation and stereotype analysis, you were also not too fond of criticism that concerned underage sexualisation/nudity, all of that was "SJW stuff" and therewith censorship for you. Sadly you were a massive dick about it and strangely unconcerned with understanding the actual stance or science (quote from November 2015):

I failed to predict that the only difference between 2014 and 2018 would be that the gamergate threads would use past tenses.

Look, I, unlike you try not to view people as members of groups with a collective will and behaviour. I don't hold individuals necessarily responsible for the actions of a group and don't see ''your people'' and ''our people''. So you can stop it with that individuality-respecting liberal mindset of yours of treating people like drones of a either higher cause.

Criticism that is based on the quack science that what a person sees in media influences them to do bad things in real life is of course invalid criticism. Articles that are filled with that are absolutely wrong, or at worst biased because they don't analyse the other side, which is the truth and the science that supports it, which is that most of these studies linking stuff with media is done with questionable research methods and retarded standards of data analysis.

I'll put in a way you'll understand. Those so-called journalists are writing about how the global climate is improving and safe and becoming more human-favourable without addressing the truth of climate change, or even talking about it in the article. Is that biased or not?

It wasn't just criticism, it was criticism based on zero facts and one that didn't look at both sides. I don't know what I said about underage sexualization or what you saw as me saying, but if you know what anime is, you'll know that they will have a 12-y/o looking character who is actually just 18 and similar stuff. I don't know what your quarrel is with that, and what you intend to do when you find out there are in fact people in real life who look younger than they actually are, and I don't really care. Its not CP, its not harmful, so its OK.

What exactly is wrong with that quote? There is actually some kind of ''science'' that says there are people like that? It would be hypocritical of you to trash other people for their beliefs you think are not grounded in reality and then push bullshit retarded quack-science like this.

It's no use that you're reiterating this strawman, it's still a strawman, and you're ignoring science in the very same way Donald Trump ignores climate science: He sure knows it's there, but ignoring it is so much more convenient, and a douche for the conscience, because damn all those fake news climate scientists were practically asking for their resignation when they refused to stop pushing that crap. Remind you of some folks? Yeahhhh.

Cultivation theory is real, dude, but it never meant what you're insinuating it means (see our 1,242 discussions on the subject plus those you had with others actually knowledgeable). You're also lumping in countless journalists and media critics with your standard falsification of the argument, quite a heinous leap I will say. Look, I, unlike you, try not to view people as members of groups with a collective will and behaviour. I'm aware that a heap of former gamergate supporters have grown up in the meantime and educated themselves a whole bunch, particularly after their very own communicative weapon arsenal had handed the orange head the presidency, of course. That had an undeniably sobering effect from the obsession with one's own destructive power. The cult is dying, and it is dying because it has been so very senseless and silly to begin with.

deleted