Home » News » When keyboard warriors go to war
News

When keyboard warriors go to war

Microsoft versus Sony, Battlefield versus Call of Duty and Forza versus Gran Turismo. These are some of the rivalries that can get people talking about console wars. “Game On or Game Over” is your place to get inside the minds of Nicholas and Andy as they seek to find the true meaning of gaming and tackle some of gaming’s most controversial subjects. Both are award winning authors – although the awards haven’t been mailed or created yet — but trust them. Would they lie to you?

Nicholas: Despite everyone on the internet claiming to have had enough of the term, and just when you thought you’d heard the last of it, #gamergate has been making the rounds yet again. For those who haven’t be following the news, everyone’s favourite topic has resurfaced after it was recently announced by the promoters of Supernova (an annual pop-culture-based convention across Australia) that they were standing by their decision to invite Adam Baldwin to the event as a guest speaker. Baldwin, known originally for his acting (particularly in the TV-hit Firefly), has received a fair amount of criticism following the events of gamergate that he is credited to have starting. Furthermore, this criticism has continued since it was announced he was coming to Supernova, with an outcry from various figures in the cosplay/gaming/pop-culture community against the promoters for not cancelling his spot.

To kick things off this week I wanted to get your opinions on the events above. There’s no doubt that a lot of negativity came out of gamergate, so do you think the community’s opinions towards Baldwin and requesting his guest appearance to be cancelled from Supernova are justified?

Andy: I have to be honest here, I am so tired of hearing about this whole #gamergate thing. I am to the point now where if I see it mentioned on Twitter, Facebook or an article on a website I just scroll right past it. (Does that mean I wouldn’t read our article that we are writing right now?)  I think it’s moved beyond an issue where level heads are talking about actual change on either side for the better of the gaming industry. Rather, in my opinion, it’s become two sides both on the fringe of either spectrum, bitching back and forth and offering no real discourse other than regarding how “bad” the other side is. I’m still not sure how attacking a person, or group with vitriol and hate will lead to any semblance of positive change.

I did see some stuff on Baldwin and Supernova and from the outside looking in, it seems like the same group of gamergate people who want an inclusive environment for everyone, in turn want to petition Baldwin to not be welcome. Which, correct me if I’m wrong, goes against the very thing they are trying to be the champion of. It’s that type of logic and representation that has completely turned me off about caring for what either side is trying to get across. Instead of getting me to actively care about whatever the hell either side is talking about, I can only see it as a school yard argument between two groups of kids who think that the one who screams the loudest will be victorious.

It’s not about either side being right or wrong, that’s not for me to judge – and honestly I don’t care too. The issue, as I see it – which neither side will admit too – is no-one is acting like adults. Just do a Google search for gamergate and see what pops up. Threats of violence from both sides, publishing personal information… again from both sides, and just general childish behaviour. “I don’t like what you have to say so I’ll make a petition so you can’t say it at X convention.” I can’t remember the last time I read or heard something about gamergate that made a logical discussion of perceived issues. In my opinion, why not let Baldwin come to Supernova and have him sit on a roundtable moderated discussion and start making things right so that everyone can put their energies towards making the game industry better instead of tearing everything down? Is that asking for too much at this point? Is it even worth having a discussion like that, or should most gamers just hope for the day that gamergate isn’t clickbait and the “cool” thing to talk about?

adambaldwin

Nicholas: Honestly, I’m impressed. You’ve raised some points above and described your view in a way that I didn’t really consider before, and the way you’ve articulated it, just wow. Not to say you don’t do that usually of course. I think you speak a lot of truths above – there are only two ways people approach discussions on ‘gamergate’ today. Either you’re arguing one side or another (rather passionately) or you’re rolling your eyes at the fact it’s being mentioned once again. I don’t think you’re alone in being part of that second camp, and I’d wager a lot of our readers might be with you there.

What you’ve said about inviting Baldwin to discuss the events that took place and seeing what can be done to improve the community is a really interesting point and perhaps the thing I’m most like to see. It’s been a number of events since gamergate blow up, and it would be interesting to see his opinions on what unfolded and seeing why he did it. I’m sure he wouldn’t be the kind of person to advocate or suggest violence or abuse towards women, and I think that’s the greatest issue with people choosing to boycott these conventions because he would be attending. Baldwin isn’t some kind of misogynistic cult leader aiming to supress an entire gender in the gaming community.

Moving on, now without rehashing a lot of the conversation that has already taken place regarding gamergate, I wanted to look at the decision from developers and sponsors who have recently decided to boycott upcoming events regarding security fears and Baldwin’s upcoming appearance. On the 20th February we saw two examples of this – firstly The Ledger Awards deciding to pull sponsorship for Supernova and secondly, Giant Spacekat pulling their booth from PAX East. What are your thoughts on this? Understanding that people will say we can’t comment because we are “white males”, do you think people’s fears of violence and assault at these conventions because of one person’s attendance or influence on others are valid?

Andy: Careful there, that was pretty close to sounding like a compliment. But, to answer the second question first, without being in anyone’s shoes and knowing the communications they have had I can’t in good conscience fault anyone for wanting to stay safe. If someone legitimately has a concern over their safety and well-being then by all means do what you have to do to stay safe. I don’t think anyone would fault someone for doing that. With that said, I don’t think when that decision is made that it has to be done with such a big production, multiple interviews, Facebooks posts, Twitter posts etc. When anyone does that type of stuff, it comes across – to me anyway – as someone making a post on a message board saying they are leaving the message board. It’s like a kid throwing a temper tantrum to make sure that you see how mad they are. Make the decision that’s best for you, act like an adult and move on. I think it’s really that simple.

Onto groups pulling sponsorships and such, not much we can really say about that either. At the end of the day, the brand has to do what it thinks is best for the brand. We see it all the time when a celebrity does something that casts a negative light on them, that the sponsors do everything they can to distance themselves from that individual. That’s another thing where I don’t really feel comfortable casting judgment on a group, business or what have you for protecting their beliefs. That doesn’t mean I agree or disagree with it, but I understand it. At the end of the day every business has things that they want to be known for and if something doesn’t mesh with those standards or beliefs then it’s time to part ways.

Since we started this article I have, begrudgingly, done some more research into it and there’s something I’ve noticed from both sides. It seems people on both sides of the fence don’t really want to focus on broader issues. There are a handful of prominent names that keep appearing and they seem to always want to make it about them. Don’t believe me? Just look and listen for how many times they say “I” in their statements, interviews etc. Again, I’m not taking sides here because it’s prevalent on both of them. Everyone involved is acting like children wanting to make sure that we pay attention to them. They go out of their way to make sure the media sees and hears them. Which leads me to my question, how much of #gamergate has been fuelled by the media making sure that they are always talking about it? Has the media made this a bigger issue than what it is, or at the very least kept it at the forefront for longer than it should have been?

briannawu

Nicholas: Oh, undoubtedly, for both questions. The doxing that took place at the beginning of this entire debacle was abhorrent, without question, and I understand why there was attention placed on it, but eventually the same discussions about trolls online and this rampant ‘misogyny’ took over, and that’s where we’ve been for a while. It’s not to suggest that there isn’t an issue with people being scumbags online, and once again, I’m not sure how we can deal with it, but to me it just seems like any remnants of gamergate are just re-iterating the same issues and themes that so many people have been talking about for a long time now. It’s the same thing just with a new name – but one that has a much harsher stigma attached to it. What do you think? I know this will sound horrible, but with all this gamergate discussion – it’s nothing new.

I wanted to go back to the safety concerns at conventions though if I may. Now I’ve been to a number of gaming events and conferences now during my time as a writer in the media, and there’s one thing I always notice about the people who attend. Gamers, for the greater part, appear to be socially awkward, who, if they aren’t hiding behind the guise of their favourite anime character, spent a lot of their time just looking down rather than making eye contact with each other. Now I know that I’m generalising here, but it isn’t as if conventions like PAX or EB Expo are rampant with roid-junkies who go around trying to imitate fellow attendees. Hell, the few gamers I know who are super into weights and gym are either wearing Dragonball Z shirts or leggings with unicorns and rainbows on them. Hardly what I’d call ‘macho’.

Of course, despite what I’ve said above, there are still creeps who will attend conferences, but in the same way that creeps are at all events and places (shopping malls, etc.). While I hate the term, a lot of online trolls are really nothing more than ‘keyboard warriors’, and I don’t think most of them would have the guts to look someone in the eye that they’ve slandered online, let along assault them verbally or physically in-person. I know you’ve answered it already, but do you agree with my assessment above, and once again, do you think people should fear the trolls they come across online in real life?

Andy: For sure. I think with anything we do now there is a chance an idiot/troll will be there trying to cause trouble. The quote from The Dark Knight rings true “Some men just want to watch the world burn.” Technology has just given them an avenue to do it with little resistance and full anonymity. I would say, and I think most would agree, that the vast majority of people who act like ass-hats would be beside themselves if someone confronted them in-person. That’s not to say that there isn’t that one person out there that would follow through on a threat.

I don’t know about you, but if I honestly felt threatened by an email, Facebooks post, Twitter comment or a message board post the last thing I’d do is run to the media and do seven interviews about it, right after I make several Twitter posts and update my Facebook page every five minutes. I would go to the authorities, give them as much information as they needed, have them help me assess the true threat level and act accordingly. I truly don’t see the logic in making sure everyone knows that you received a threatening message and all the steps you have taken to make sure people know. It’s almost like people are saying “Hey look at me look at me, feel sorry for me… but don’t say anything to offend me or I’ll show everyone that you offended me.” Again, back to a little kid analogy, a little kid trips and falls in the grass. There’s no way they are hurt, it was a minor stumble. They look around to make sure a parent saw them and then start wailing away as if their leg has fallen off. The parent walks to the kid brushes them off, kisses the knee and the kid is back running around.

When I wrote my review for Destiny last year I received a couple… shall we say, interestingly worded responses. One was what I would consider a threat, but oddly enough it didn’t make the news. Fox News didn’t come calling, I didn’t do interviews on Polygon, Kotaku or even Stevivor. I read it, laughed and deleted it. I know it’s shocking, but I haven’t heard from that person since and nothing bad has happened to me. Like you said though, we are at a point with this whole #gamergate thing where it’s become a constant rehash of things we have already heard. I’m not even sure when it started, but there comes a time when someone has to act like an adult and start putting things to rest… shouldn’t they? If we truly represent the majority of gamers who are sick of hearing about it, why is it that people, sites etc. are still talking about it?

trollface

Nicholas: I think it’s for two reasons. Firstly, because everyone is hating on gamergate (whether that be the underlying issues or the discussions themselves), it’s a current hot topic. As much as we want it to die down, something new happens (like a sponsor pulling out of a convention) that just happens to be linked to gamergate and news sites want to cover it. Secondly, I think it’s because deep-down, everyone wants to continue talking about it. Either you’re for the discussion because you want to continue pushing this issue of sexism or you want to argue against it, or you want criticise those who are. So while there’s nothing good about gamergate, it’s something we’re still not willing to let go.

You know, the topic of ‘sexism’ and ‘misogyny’ in the industry has been talked about within the community for as long as I’ve been active online. We discuss trolls and people being ass-hats all the time, and as much as we speak about having to make a change, nothing ever really does. To end this week’s discussion I wanted to ask you – do you realistically, I mean, actually, think we’ll ever see a ‘hate-free’ online community? Is it worth bringing up these ‘issues’ time and time again if it’s leading to no-where, or is it time to start blocking, ignoring and moving on?

Andy: Do I think we’ll ever see a ‘hate-free’ online community? No. As we’ve touched on already, one of the issues with things moving online is the anonymity and lack of ownership. I can say what I want, and be someone I’m not because I will never see anyone in person. Is it worth bringing them up time and time again? Yes. With the caveat that if people really want to see a significant change then they have to be committed to it and not come at it just to bitch and complain. It’s extremely easy to point out an issue, cast light on it and jump up and down saying how bad it is. Yet, it’s another thing to actively offer up viable solutions. Gamers are great at pointing out problems, but terrible with trying to help fix them.

I really do think it’s good to bring up issues that can be improved on, if no-one ever tried to make things better we’d still be playing Pong while sitting on the living room floor. From my experience too often gamers, and people in and around the gaming industry, try to facilitate change by bashing the issue with a pickup truck. There is no finesse, no diplomacy and no sense of covering all the bases. It’s boiled down to “If I don’t like situation X you have to change it because I said so! And I’ll get all my friends to agree.” Then they stick their fingers in their ears and run around the playground sticking their tongues out at people trying to tell their side of the issue.

To me it seems like #gamergate and all the other cut catchphrases before it boil down to no-one wanting to hear the other side and their way is the only right way. Like it or not, the state of gaming, the gaming industry and the gaming community as a whole, is a direct reflection on how we treat each other. There is no longer a dialog about making things the best they can be for everyone. There’s no dialog on how to change things so that the community as a whole can grow and prosper. Instead the only dialog that exists is getting in-front of as many cameras as possible, setting up as many interviews as possible to make sure that everyone knows how wronged you were and how right your opinion is. Until that changes, there will be no change of significance. Some people may want to watch the world burn. Others, well, they just want to make sure the world sees them.

Tune in next time for the next instalment of Game On or Game Over. If you have any ideas for our next article, feel free to contact Andy or Nicholas on Twitter.


This article may contain affiliate links, meaning we could earn a small commission if you click-through and make a purchase. Stevivor is an independent outlet and our journalism is in no way influenced by any advertiser or commercial initiative.

About the author

Nicholas Simonovski

Events and Racing Editor at Stevivor.com. Proud RX8 owner, Strange Music fan and Joe Rogan follower. Living life one cheat meal at a time.

About the author

Andy Gray

From the frozen land of Minnesota, I was the weird kid that begged my parents for an Intellivision instead of an Atari. My love for gaming has only grown since. When I’m not gaming I enjoy ice hockey and training dogs. I’m still trying to get my Elkhound to add to my Gamerscore though, one day this will happen.