LogFAQs > #904809224

YMIHere posted...

The difference to me is you can expect devs to pull every dirty trick in the book for sales, their job is to sell games. The press' job on the other hand is to inform the public. So one is doing their job in a s***ty way, while the other is doing the opposite of their job. Not that one is worse than the other, just that they are two different things. I don't think the plan was to go after indie devs, they just happened to be more likely to be the ones caught in these conflicts of interest.

Yeah but they're the ones doing the shit. It's not OK just because you can expect them to do it. They're the ones putting pressure on game journalists to act unethically in the first place. And they're the ones with money and power to put the journalists out of a job. The publishers are the ones who can put insane conditions on a game reaching a certain number on metacritic, and if it doesn't get there the devs suffer immensely. The publishers are the ones who can strangle access to events, reviewer copies, ad revenue, etc for the game journalists. Yet people are getting upset at the guys getting strongarmed.

And then by some freak coincidence there's a lot of misogyny, just like pretty much any other toxic online community.
I'll gladly concede that there's a problem with game journalism, and it's been well known long before Gamergate blew up. Wasn't it famously ranked by Reuters or someone really, really low? But addressing the symptoms instead of the cause seems like it won't help much.
---

Everything has an end, except for the sausage. It has two.