"It's a sorry state of affairs when yet another female games developer is threatened to the point that she feels the need to leave her home for fear of her life, all for doing the thing she loves most; creating games.
Brianna Wu, head of development at all-female outfit Giant Spacekat has been forced to leave her home with her husband and involve the police after receiving death threats and abuse on the popular micro-blogging website Twitter."
Brianna Wu, a game developer who stood up for women facing harassment in the game industry, has decided to run for the U.S. House of Representatives.
“My main agenda will be economic. [...] I think we can do a much better job keeping startups here in our state. Also, look at the game industry, which has been devastated here in Boston with the loss of Irrational and others."
Replies(5)
"Brianna Wu, a game developer who stood up for women facing harassment in the game industry" stopped reading at that point. I refuse to click.
Yeah. I too rather like to rely on snap judgments and won't read anything that might educate me on someone's stance and platform. What purpose would that serve!?
I also like to announce to the world that I refuse to see how someone who is seeking to represent us all thinks about those she chooses to serve.
@thorstein
Who the hell is this "all" that she represents, because she certainly does NOT represent gamers. And if you think she does then you two deserve each other and the sjw bs I'm sure you'll love when she regurgitates it.
When someone runs for office, they represent all of the people. Whether you wanted Clinton or Trump they represent all of the people (We the People). That is how it works.
You also misunderstand me. Check my comments. I have always argued for journalistic integrity before gamergate, during gamergate, and after gamergate. After reading through these comments (people refer to her as "it") I have to wonder what the motivation is for commenting.
I am sarcastic because your comment doesn't even allow you to hear out what the person has said.
I don't actually disagree with what she has said in this article. I don't think many people would. Despite comments during gamergate, I would want a representative to be at least mildly aware of what is going on in the digital age. Just look at the science committee (full of science denying morons.) But this is what she said from the article (again, ignoring gamergate)
"“My main agenda will be economic. Here in Massachusetts, taxpayers spend an amazing amount on subsidizing education – particularly with infrastructure. But then students and entrepreneurs take that investment by our state to San Francisco or Austin,” she said. “I think we can do a much better job keeping startups here in our state. Also, look at the game industry, which has been devastated here in Boston with the loss of Irrational and others.
“I’d hope to serve on the House technology subcommittee. It was very disturbing to me to see members of the House tie the Mirai botnet (malware that hijacks computers) to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), simply parroting special interests. It’s an example of how our tech policy doesn’t serve the American people. We need people making policy that actually understand technology, that understand the assault on our privacy. It’s a national security issue, and we’re failing badly.”"
O' look, another feminist/SJW nut job running for office. I would say I'm thankful to be living in Canada, but we have our own problems with these type of people up here.
While I think political correctness can be ridiculous at times, to say you have a problem with people standing up for other people just shows the narrow lens through which you view the world. Honestly, it's people like you that are the reason these SJWs, as you like to call them, exist. It's easier to sweep things under the rug and move on like the dirt isn't there, but we've clearly tried that, and it doesn't work. People don't know history. That's the bulk of it. You can't move forward if you don't know where you've been, which is why socially, we keep making the same mistakes over and over again. And when you see these SJWs they are a reminder that things aren't okay for everyone. But when you intentionally choose to ignore that fact, or fool yourself into thinking things are fine, or weigh your irritability above the rights of other people, you're a passive contributor. I just don't understand why SJWs would ever offend you if you don't represent the very ideals they're fighting against.
That being said, this lady can run, but I wouldn't vote for her purely because her platform is to make video games great again? I'm a gamer, but if you're a game developer and you're out of work, you have massive amounts of coding experience. You can get a job literally anywhere.
"context" I applaud those who have the fortitude to take a stand especially at great risk to themselves. I dont support people who are just as vulgar and vile as the ones they are standing against. She is no saint. She is vile, nasty, and hate-filled. If I am to believe the news we already have one of those as the soon to be commander in chief. Do we really need more, or is it okay because its the side you believe in?
These are the people we DONT need, these are the people who cause problems not discussions. We need true leaders who actually have ETHICS and MORALS. If you do an easy google search you can clearly see she has none by her responses to adversity.
You can advocate to fix problems without going full SJw. SJws actually hurt the causes they claim to support because they end up. Alienating the people they need on their side
"to say you have a problem with people standing up for other people just shows the narrow lens through which you view the world."
Except that isn't what he said. He said we have our own problems with SJWs because we do. Small example of what kind of stuff happens here in Canada.
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Does that look like "standing up for people."
"Honestly, it's people like you that are the reason these SJWs, as you like to call them, exist."
Showing you don't know the first thing about SJWs. SJWs do not exist because people don't like them. SJWs exist to spread cultural marxism and the idea that any hardship you face in life is faced because a self-identified ruling class is oppressing you and you must fight it. It is spread by people with serious self-identity issues, a victim complex, and unwarranted and undeserved ego stroking from parents who didn't want to be anything like their own parents and yet never attempted to instill character and values into their children.
"It's easier to sweep things under the rug and move on like the dirt isn't there, but we've clearly tried that, and it doesn't work."
Lol what?
"People don't know history."
Including you it seems.
"socially, we keep making the same mistakes over and over again."
Because we don't learn that social marxism is cancerous to prosperity.
"And when you see these SJWs they are a reminder that things aren't okay for everyone"
No, they are a reminder that ignorant vocal minorities are a cross every society has born for all time. I don't know where you've been but things are not okay for anyone, not just some specific groups. There is only one real privilege in this world, and that's wealth privilege. And contrary to what you think, money doesn't discriminate. All these alleged systems put in place to keep specific groups down are the exact same thing as chem trails and F.E.M.A. death camps. Conspiracy theories.
"or weigh your irritability above the rights of other people, you're a passive contributor."
You mean like the SJWs do all the time only to take it further and attempt to have their feelings be granted the power to infringe on other people's rights?
"I just don't understand why SJWs would ever offend you if you don't represent the very ideals they're fighting against."
Perhaps because you don't have to be to be targeted by them? SJWs are fans of gross generalizations. White privilege, male privilege, cis privilege. They group people together and then call these groups problematic. Then when you defend yourself they come at you with "Look, having privilege doesn't make you bad, you just have to recognize that you have it and do something about it." And if you don't, that's when you're bad. But see they'll never come right out and say what they want you to do about it. What they want you to do about it is give it up, assuming you even can. They want you to hand over your "privilege" to who they consider to be the oppressed. Meaning if you have wealth privilege, then maybe you should stop making so much money for yourself and give it to black people. If you have majority ethnicity privilege, then you should lobby to have either your rights reduced, or the rights of trans people elevated which would grant them special privileges. And that is what is offensive.
You have to look at what people are saying before you gallop to their defense. I don't buy into the 'war on men', the same way I have never felt anyone is less than me due to gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation or whatever. We're all decomposing meat bags in my view, what the hell is the point in hating someone over something so petty? BUT! Declaring you're a victim at every turn, that we live in a patriarchal society and it somehow promotes rape culture? That's a real problem.
The 'SJW' thing wouldn't be such a thing if people were willing to open themselves to dialogues, I don't think anyone here hates women, LGBT members or people of differing ethnicity. It's when people get told they must conform to X, otherwise they are Y and thus must be abhorred. No me not taking your Black History flyer doesn't make me a white supremacist, and declaring I am is in itself racist. Because I am white and have little interest in your xerox'd flier which just laundry lists how ole whitey is the devil, I am racist? That don't jive, but that's the mentality that gets thrown around.
Look at it this way, me and @DragonKnight do not see eye to eye on a bunch of subjects, even got a bit pointed with one another. Yet I can listen to him and what he has to say, digest it and come to my own conclusions and as far as I can tell he doesn't have an issue with that. That's dialogue, that's back and forth and having a discussion. Learn from one another.
Calling me a pig, rape apologist, scum, patriarchal all of that, all it does is hurt me because I'm none of those things and do my best to treat people honestly and respectfully and it pushes me more to the other camp because unless you say "Aye captain!" on every single one of their points, you're no better than a KKK member in their eyes.
The us vs them mentality has got to stop, and until it does we're doomed to repeat this shit until we just kill one another.
@DragonKnight
"SJWs are fans of gross generalizations. White privilege, male privilege, cis privilege. They group people together and then call these groups problematic."
This is the central theme of your post, and the irony of this statement is just brilliant.
Cultural Marxism? Definition:
"Cultural Marxism is the Marxist dialectic fused with Freudian theory and applied to identity and culture. Like all forms of Marxism, it is based upon categorizing people into abstract groups and then creating a narrative of historical oppression between them."
-Google
Here's the problem. Facts. I know facts are a thing of the past, but we have documentation of laws that were specifically designed to oppress groups of people. The narrative wasn't made up. I mean if you want to call a banana cultural Marxism, that's fine, but I'm still going to put a cultural Marxism in my smoothie because it doesn't matter what you call it. It is what it is.
You just proved my point. Some of these oppressive laws were changed, and you choose to believe that it's an open and shut case. These laws came from the beliefs of people, and some of these people are still alive, and if they're not, they've passed on their intolerance to their children. I do find it interesting that if one feels the weight of oppression, it's because of the way you were raised according to you, however you choose ignore that people aren't born to hate; they are taught to hate. Selective amnesia at its best.
"I know facts are a thing of the past, but we have documentation of laws that were specifically designed to oppress groups of people."
Show me a current law that is racist, or sexist, in intent that is enforced in the First World that is NOT against men and we'll agree. Otherwise you're talking out of your a**. Saying "things used to be like this" is not an argument. It's a common SJW argument to have black and white photos or Dead Sea Scrolls to say "see how bad it was" and act as though nothing has changed.
"The narrative wasn't made up."
Yes it was. It was made up when people ignored how business is conducted and insisted that businesses were purposely not renting houses to black people because they are black and not because of their unreliable financial history/status as individuals. It was made up with the gender wage gap which is half myth half misleading statistics. There are countless lies SJWs say every day that make up the narrative. You pick any form of alleged legally sanctioned oppression and there is a counter to show you it doesn't exist.
"Some of these oppressive laws were changed, and you choose to believe that it's an open and shut case."
Where law is concerned it IS an open and shut case. If you have a law that says "women must be paid half of what a man is paid" and then that law is changed to "everyone is paid equally regardless of their sex", then you've just shut that case. The law exists then to act as a hammer with any who don't comply. The problem is that Cultural Marxists are looking for parity. Equality of Outcome. And they don't care who they have to take anything from to get it, nor what it will do to society as a result.
"These laws came from the beliefs of people, and some of these people are still alive, and if they're not, they've passed on their intolerance to their children."
Oh come off it. You're fabricating an invisible oppressive force so that you can always say oppression exists and that's just dishonest. Ideas can be fought, facts can be gathered, but that's not good for your narrative so you have to invent something that can't be fought so you can use it to justify the atrocities you're going to commit as being in the best interests of the "oppressed." Even when the people who are allegedly part of the "oppressed" group disagree with you.
"I do find it interesting that if one feels the weight of oppression, it's because of the way you were raised according to you, however you choose ignore that people aren't born to hate; they are taught to hate."
No one in the First World feels the weight of oppression because no one in the First World is being oppressed. You cannot be a part of a culture where you are granted every right and at the same time be oppressed. To make that claim means to not understand what oppression is, and that's true of all Cultural Marxists. And no, I'm not ignoring anything. SJWs are taught to hate every day in Universities around the world. The people they attack are then taught to hate the SJWs for the assaults they launch. The difference is that one side lacks basic critical thinking skills and facts, and the other was just trying to live their lives in peace.
I think you misunderstand people's discontent with the SJW tactics as not appreciating, or even supporting their supposed cause.
Many people here are pretty well versed with what Wu did during Gamergate, and how she used it to her advantage. Her "standing up" was nothing but posturing to promote herself. Plain and simple. She has no talent as a game developer whatsoever. She has no clue how to make a game. No one would even know who she was if it weren't for GG and her piggybacking on the hate train that Leigh Alexander and Anita Sarkeesian started to promote their own career.
The thing is, most people around here that I"ve seen aren't against the idea of equality. They are very much against being made into the cause of other people's oppression, and they don't like being generalized to the point of being marginalized, when those generalizations are 100% against the entire community of people that care about playing and talking about games, not being activist or discussing equality on a wide spectrum political level.
But, if you want to really see people who sweep things under the rug, I strongly encourage you to look into Brenda Wu. Go places that actually aren't influenced by all the stupid revisionist history that the so called SJW elite have made the public narrative, and you will see things that would disgust any rational person....and it has nothing to do with her political views, or hating her because she has them.
So come down off that high horse, and you'll see that people around here have reasons to be instantly defensive against the SJW movement, and as Dragon said, these extremist that exist, ruin those who actually try hard to make real positive change.
As far as the current narrative not being made up....go read the Gamergate Wiki page. It's so full of twisted history, and is nowhere near the truth because it was referenced to all the public perception of what actually happened. And that's the narrative that exists....and that's what they want, not truth, not equality. They want to control and to be superior.
Why are reports of not gaming related or lame allowed to be marked as fixed?? Nothing has changed and I and another user considered this to be a lame piece. If the rest of the community deems it worthy to up vote then fair enough it is what it is but votes from users who deem otherwise (when considered lame or not gaming related) should not be allowed to be marked as fixed by the uploader.
How is it not gaming related when she was in fact a major topic on gaming in recent enough times, is a developer (yes of poor content games maybe?), and even talks about 'game industry' in the article?
I mean we can hate her and the subject of politics and gaming mixed, but to say this is not gaming related is not genuine.
"Game developer ______ goes out for golf" is that statement gaming related just because it was a game developer doing it?
Unless the game developer is actually iconic for actual gaming related contributions that don't include being a professional victim , then their non gaming activities don't count as "gaming related"
@Big_Game_Hunters - Except this game developer (yes loose identification at best) is not just playing golf but running for Congress. And in doing so started conversation directly on gaming industry where congress has a bit of influence in what happens with our industry. And on top of that, it is her infamous history in gaming industry that makes the discussion even more pertinent. Just because a lot of us think she is 'full of it' doesn't mean that her negative impact on gaming isn't news worthy.
Moe Long writes: "Whether it's groundbreaking design and mechanics or advocacy for individuals and diversity within the industry, Wu constantly brings a fresh and much needed perspective. I recently had the great pleasure of chatting with Brianna about her work at GSX, development challenges, and the state of the industry."
"Brianna Wu is leading a revolution in gaming"
LOL!!! stopped reading after that.
Head of development at Giant Spacekat explains why women in tech is about making better games.
That's because we've hit a point we're technology isn't a barrier that affects gameplay. That's all that happened. Besides, AAA games aren't going to be artsy and are therefore grounded in some aspects.
People buy the game's they want and there is a reason why AAA games are like they are.
but you can still make aaa games that can innovate. this is why they are pushing vr and ar so much. they are trying to get a larger audience out there, not the same audience. the wii managed to bring in new players but it was temporary.
you look at the consoles and what are the biggest marketed games? the same ones last generation, call of duty, assassins creed, uncharted, halo...
this is where some credit needs to go back to nintendo. while they use the same ip's like zelda and mario they explore new ways to innovate the gameplay. sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't but at least they try new ideas. how is playing killzone and halo any different than before? how is playing uncharted and assassincs creed much different than before? they are essentially the same games over and over.
wait, so kanye's article failed, HHG no longer allowed, but N4G still allow this obvious agenda driven crap?
Holy crap I remember HHG Lol. I still remember the 2 comment sections. Normal comments and the comment section for banned people LOL, "warzone" I believe. I loved that, to bad they took it out.
Blame the admins if you get enough approvals and they still don't like it they can still fail your post I got a PM summing it up for me that way...
What does Innovation got to do with women? There always have been men and women behind every innovation in the last 30+ years of gaming history... This comes across like the industry has been a sausage fest... far from it. It consisted of both men and women the whole period and STILL does to this day.
Buddy, this is Brianna Wu. You can't expect someone like her to make rational points and arguments.
Brianna Wu has a habit of playing the victim card and making it seem like everyone is against her and her gender.
Look at her written work for proof.
"Wu, Brianna (April 11, 2013). "Choose your character: Faced with change, an all-female indie dev team evolves to a higher form". The Magazine (14).
Wu, Brianna (April 24, 2014). "Why GitHub's unconvincing investigation harms women in games development". The Mary Sue.
Wu, Brianna (July 22, 2014). "Opinion: No skin thick enough: The daily harassment of women in the game industry". Polygon.
Wu, Brianna (October 16, 2014). "It happened to me: I've been forced out of my home and am living in constant fear because of relentless death threats from Gamergate". xoJane.
Wu, Brianna (October 20, 2014). "Rape and death threats are terrorizing female gamers. Why haven't men in tech spoken out?". The Washington Post.
Wu, Brianna (February 11, 2015). "I'm Brianna Wu, And I'm Risking My Life Standing Up To GamerGate". Bustle."
She'd happily have men in chains if she ran things.
Ok, so I'm not a fan of this guy but I'm gonna try and see if I can explain what I THINK the line of thought is. Even if it is full of assumptions.
Ok, here goes...
- Games are made by people.
- These people are usually white men.
- Diversity in terms of creators causes diversity in creations. Gaming or otherwise.
- An innovative game is worth while always. Even if it isn't good. At least it's innovation can help move gaming as a whole forward.
- Women, not being white men, therefore, make games that help gaming out of the difference in perspective.
So, that's what I think he meant.
This person has an obvious agenda and she ain't pushing it on me.
I believe that diversity in all of its forms can certainly breed innovation, but she tries to make it sound like somehow the current devs are incapable innovating and, its BS. I love when she calls out Forza. ha! I mean racers like Forza innovate in their own ways like with social aspects etc. But some games, like racing sims, are not gonna be artsy and niche. And AAA games have been innovating in many ways. Sure you have your CoDs ect., but look at some of the other games like Titanfall and the upcoming Quantum Break. And Sony in particular has had a slew of innovative AAA games in the last decade.
Ms. Wu thinks she can push her own feminist agenda at the expense of all the other talent in the industry that has already been innovating in a great number of ways (the indie scene is booming...women included).
So yes, more women isn't bad. And yes, women, like any other group, should keep pushing for more representation in games. But don't do it at the expense of other devs, many who likely support gender equality in games and many who already take risks and put themselves out there for the sake of innovation.
Nice try though Bri
Then you're looking in the wrong place, not to mention you're doing very little to back up you argument, the only things you bring up is Forza, A SIMULATOR (can't really innovate in a simulator) and a VR tech demo. How about instead of staring at the AAA's under a damn microscope you look up at the giant landscape of gaming in general. In fact i see innovation on the rise more so than it has been since things went 3D. We got people who can are are making games with nothing more than an idea, something that could NEVER have been done before. Even AAA publishers are starting to take note of the hyper creative indie scene with experiences like Valiant Hearts, Unraveled, Going Home, and some more that i can't remember the names of right now.
A bit off topic but just about everything I was looking forward to this holiday year has either been delayed or it's had some bullcrap going on with it..
Uncharted 4 - Delayed
Persona 5 - Delayed
Star Wars: Battlefront - No campaign and not enough content to justify the price tag
Rainbow Six Siege - No campaign and not enough content to justify the price tag
So that leaves me with the Uncharted collection and I already own all 3 games on the PS3..
This gen has been nothing but less AAA games, delays, constant game droughts, half a**ed games and games with content stripped so developers can shove bullsh*t season passes and pre-order DLC down out throats. SO FAR this generation has been the WORSE.
On topic.. I partly agree with her. There is no innovation anymore but I don't agree with the notion that there's no innovation because of there not being enough females involved with game development. That's just feminist propaganda. 1 reason is that it's harder to innovate because there isn't a barrier of technology that affects gameplay like GreetingsfromCanada pointed out. 1 of the other reasons there is no innovation is because AAA games have gotten more expensive and publishers and developers don't want to take risk's like they used to. Why take risk's with new IP's when you can pump out the same Call of Duty games and Assasins Creed games that'll sell 10 million copies and are guaranteed to make your money back? This is a business at the end of the day.
The main PS4 exclusive JRPG's I'm looking forward too are Persona 5, The Last Guardian, Attack on Titan, Gravity Rush 2 and Nioh but those don't come out till next year..
I never played Dragon's Quest or any of the games in the Tales series but I might give either 1 of them a try. I only just got into JRPG's during the PS3 era so I didn't play any of the Tales and Dragon Quest games that came before on the PS1 and PS2. I'm not well versed in those series so hopefully those 2 games are not the type of games where I have to follow the story and play the other ones to understand the story. I might definitely check 1 of them out and get them off of Amazon. I got spare money I was going to use this holiday on my card just lying there anyway and it doesn't look like I'll be getting much this holiday lol
Patience :)
The wait will be worth it..
We're nearly there ^_^
--
Thank goodness I have other options whilst waiting for the other platform to catch up in terms of games ->I<- like.
Tales of is like Final Fantasy. You can start of any game. If you have a PS3, you can get tales of Xillia or Tales of Grace f cheap, if you like them, you'll definitely enjoy Zestiria. Of course you can just see videos of Zestiria and jump directly to that game.
But even if you get Zestiria, I advice you to get Xillia and Grace since both are amazing, I still play them to this day.
No Mans Sky is the only game I can think of form the top of my head (there ARE more) that is using the new consoles for something more than just prettier graphics and it's definitely innovative and mindblowing in what it is doing.
Even if that game is not everybodys cup of tea, people need to look and take note on what is being done, and with just 16mb worth of code.
There's also a tonne of non AAA games taht have brought fun and interesting new twists and turns to gameplay mechanics.
As for the AAA scene, that juggernaut has become too much of a heartless business to allow room for growth or innovation. Only once in a blue moon does something special come out of that behemoths mouth. The problem is, most of the people in charge of these huge development teams didn't come from gaming, they came from Pr & Marketing firms or primarily sold produce and products with no artistic merit involved.
Who?
Edit: I see a a generation of generic ideas. Can i get an article now too?
Talk about generalizing much. Gaming Journalists that write crap like this try to put every gamer into box just because trolls (Which is what they are TROLLS) threaten people. People on youtube, IGN and other gaming related sites threaten each other all the time, but do the media make a big deal about that? No, they don't. All this article and the others like it prove that there is an obvious agenda to try slander anyone that just games as some sort of sadistic, misogynistic type of person. Gaming journalism (if you can even call it that) is nothing more than a joke. An another thing if these "so-called" journalists knew anything of #GamerGate then they would know it's not movement. It's nothing more than a collection of information that exposes these "so-called" journalists for what they really are, basically an exposition.
Can we all get along? - Rodney King
People threatened me before because I killed them too much in Killzone so what? Welcome to the internet LoL
I don't know the story behind this, but this blog seems a little ridiculous.
I doubt she received death threats for simply "doing what she loves, creating games".
She must have done something to upset people, whether it was on purpose or not.
Again, none of it justifies death threats, and the people doing it are scum, but at the same time, i find it hard to believe that they did it simply because she makes games.
I blame it on social media and children..
Social media for making things so easy to threaten ppl with no real consequence or simple way to find out who that child is..
And IMO they must be a child to feel like they have to threaten someone over a video game.