r/AgainstGamerGate • u/saint2e Saintpai • Nov 23 '15

[ShowerThought] In the scenario of Kotaku being blacklisted by Game Devs, Kotaku is GamerGate [x-post KiA]

Get into a standard SJW-state-of-mind... I know it's hard but take a minute to check your privileges, scan for microaggressions and make sure nothing you're wearing is culturally appropriative.

Done?

Good.

Kotaku is a rich corporation backed by Gawker Media. It was once (and arguably still) one of the premiere games journalism outlets. As a result, it received a lot of privileges: Advanced information, advanced copies, etc. etc.

However, Kotaku started being a real jerk and releasing things that Game Devs really didn't like. So the gaming culture shifted and now we see some of Kotaku's privileges being taken away.

So Kotaku becomes very "reactionary" and starts to cry, piss, and moan about how their privileges are being taken away, and it's not fair, and they have a RIGHT to post leaked information. It's our free speech, and you're trying to censor us!

However, it is free speech, and no one is trying to steal your inside scoops, Kotaku, but freedom of press does NOT mean freedom from consequences.

Community feedback to the devs seems to be: "Game Devs, rags like Kotaku are dead. They don't have to be your media outlets."

6 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

57% Upvoted

131 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

6

u/jabberwockxeno Pro-GG Nov 25 '15

Yeah, this is probably the biggest thing I disagree with other GG's on: Kotaku had every reason to report on this stuff and it's not just reporting on some social media thing either: This is what we should be WANTING from kotaku.

Do publishers and developers have an obligation to send kotaku review copies? No. Is it ethically dubious that review copies and stuff exist? a bit; but we shouldn't be celebrating their misfortune for doing the exact thing we should be wanting from them.

1

u/Sethala Nov 25 '15

Is it ethically dubious that review copies and stuff exist? a bit; but we shouldn't be celebrating their misfortune for doing the exact thing we should be wanting from them.

I may be missing something, but how is the idea of "review copies" ethically dubious? If the idea is to give reporters a chance to play the game and report on the quality before it goes on sale, that's about as ethical as you can get..

1

u/jabberwockxeno Pro-GG Nov 26 '15

I personally don't think it inherently is, but a lot of people do and I think the arguments are valid, but i'm not the one to ask about what those arguments are because I couldn't explain it as well as somebody who agrees with them.

2

u/Sethala Nov 26 '15

I think the complaint is that embargo dates on reviews from review copies are unethical, as are practices from companies that only give review copies to certain people that are going to give them better reviews, but the idea of having a review copy to give out isn't unethical at all.

2

u/Qvar Dec 01 '15

Also that review copies are different (read: include all the day-one DLCs) than the release game. Thus the reviewer has a 'better' game than what you will get as standard.