Harry Klegg
Procurements
Harry Klegg
Procurements
Harry Klegg
Procurements
Because Michael Savage has zero impact on the industry as a whole. He's not rigging indie competitions, blacklisting developers over political differences, openly insulting and lying about gamers while he writes about video games for a living and claims to represent their best interests, working as a journalist while dating and living with industry reps in his field of work, promoting his friend's work without disclosing his friendship with them, taking Patreon money in return for favorable press...
Okay, fair enough.
But aside from some very specific targets, who among GG's hitlist have been? Modern Art has now been dragged into their crosshairs.
I haven't heard anything about that. In fact, they're more worried about Stardock offering a rather crude pro-GG webcomic artist a chance to submit his resume than anything. Now a bunch of devs are trying to promote a boycott of him, and companies promoting a boycott is illegal.
Do you want to know their hit list? Gawker's #1. Then Polygon/Vox, Rock Paper Shotgun, Gamasutra/UMB, IGF/Indiecade, IGDA, Destructoid, Giant Bomb in no particular order. And they weren't really part of a hit list from the beginning. They had a chance to make things better, but instead they made a decision to pretend there wasn't a problem and insult the people that protested, so now GG wants them to squirm or even fold.
There are others, such as those who seek to profit off of the division they can create with identity politics. They're a little more nebulous though.
Also heard they got some kind of vendetta against Indie gaming. Anything to that, or is it just the celebratory events for them?
Against a particularly influential clique of them, yes. The Phil Fish crowd, IGF/Indiecade, and the IGDA. The developers that brownnose and schmooze with the press to sell their games (though the press is purely to blame for allowing that to happen, nevertheless, some of the press's most ardent defenders have come from these types), the
awards shows that award games for arbitrary or political reasons rather than because they're good, and a supposed professional organization that's become
far too politically charged to represent developers, or
even members of its own hierarchy. Note: the "harassers of women" referred to here are simply high-profile people within GamerGate, nearly all of which have no interest in harassing women at all.
I say nearly because there is one on the list that deserves it and is considered controversial at best. GG is far from a hivemind, after all.
I saw that list. It was rather baffling and arbitrary. Seriously, what did Kentucky Fried Chicken hae to do with anything in this scuffle?
And yea, I knew about Gone Home/Depression Quest somehow getting accolades, but consider that Payday 2, a distinctly non-politically correct indie game, got Best Multiplayer from Golden Joysticks, Destructoid Best of 2013, IGN Best of E3, Polygon Editor's Choice Award, GI's Best Multiplayer Team Game, I'd say the corruption is exaggerated on that front.
It was made with a very flawed algorithm, where if you follow two certain personalities that the creator dislikes, you're on the list, and if you want off, you have to appeal to a tribunal she's set up to prove your innocence. It also received
help in development by the IGDA, despite IGDA denials, hence GamerGate's problem with Kate Edwards and the IGDA.
The press trying to push political correctness is an issue, but yes, that's an instance of them giving credit where it's due, given that Payday 2 was a very hot game in 2013. Also, IGN has been largely neutral in all of this, to their credit. We'll see where 2014 goes, whether they'll choose to double down on their agenda or set it aside and name a popular game instead. And say they did give a little indie title developed by one of their friends "Game of the Year." What would that do to their credibility? I think they're smarter than that.
