PC Gaming

8642 readers

589 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

Be Respectful.
No Spam or Porn.
No Advertising.
No Memes.
No Tech Support.
No questions about buying/building computers.
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

397

Critics must rescore Dragon's Dogma 2 in light of microtransactions (www.downtimebros.com)

submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

136 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

We tried this already - getting ethics in game journalism.

It didn't work so well.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Can't tell if you're joking or not, but gamergate was absolutely not about "ethics in game journalism."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Did they edit their comment? Neither they nor the article mentioned gamergate.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago

"It's about ethics in gaming journalism" was the common refrain for Gamergate proponents.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago

Not joking. It absolutely was about ethics, at first. The initial kickoff was the boyfriend accusing the girl (Zoë Quinn?) of sleeping with someone else for a better review. That's ethics in a nutshell. I don't think that anyone really cared about the game, or who was involved, but rather that the state of the industry was such that you could accuse a well known game reviewer of being unethical, and it was more believable than not.

The fact is, reviewers had already sold their souls and a AAA game get anything less than a 90%. Had reviewers had better ethics, probably no one would have believed the boyfriend, and the entire story would have been a nothing-burger.

Of course it went off the rails after that, the fact that the boyfriend was lying didn't help, but for a brief moment it looked like there might actually be game news/review industry reform. It was a glorious 24 or so hours.