David Jaffe Interview—Ethics, Censorship, and #GamerGate

david jaffe 12-10-14-1

I’ve been trying to encourage more game developers, big and small, to voice their concerns, thoughts, and opinions on #GamerGate. The “consumer revolt” has been going on for over three months now, and it doesn’t seem to be slowing down at all. A few questions had been coming up in my head recently – what is GamerGate defined as, exactly? Why hasn’t it made huge progress? Why is it so hated by the so called “anti-GamerGate” side of the equation?

I came in contact with David Jaffe with these very questions. Thankfully, he gave me the opportunity to speak with him for an interview, despite his busy schedule revealing new games and the like. Below you can find the written form of our interview, and I hope you enjoy it:

Niche Gamer: I know this is kind of a silly question, but for those of our fans out there who may have not heard of you or what you’ve done, or what you’re doing now, could you just give a quick rundown?

David Jaffe: Right now, I’m a Game Director at The Bartlet Jones Supernatural Detective Agency. We just announced our new game, Drawn to Death, at the PlayStation Experience. Before that, I was the co-creator of the Twisted Metal series, the co-director, I was the Lead Director and Lead Designer on the first God of War, Creative Director on the second God of War, I did some smaller games like Mickey Mania, Calling All Cars … Last big retail title I did was Twisted Metal on PlayStation 3 back in 2012.

NG: I guess we’ll just jump right into it: Gamergate. I got into contact with you under the pretext of Gamergate, so, I just wanted to make it clear that this is not going to be a pro-, neutral, or anti- thing, we’re just trying to encourage discussion between gamers, devs, etc. What are your thoughts on the entire thing? It’s been going on for a long time. It seems like Twitter isn’t the best place to talk about this.

DJ: What are my thoughts on what specifically?

NG: On Gamergate, the movement itself, the people that are supporters of it…

DJ: I don’t think it’s a real movement. It’s a valid question but the question breaks down very quickly. In order for a movement to be a movement, almost by definition it needs a leader, it needs a manifesto, and Gamergate’s biggest problem is there are a number of things that are noble and in my opinion things that are worth supporting that some people who claim to be part of Gamergate espouse, and I’m like, Yeah, fuck yeah, I agree with that!

And there are other things because there is no real leadership, which they seem to take some twisted pride in, which is just stupid, and there is no real sense of being able to sort of bring the message back to what the essence of that “movement” is that you can almost say, “I’m really into Swiss cheese, and that’s what Gamergate stands for.” And who’s gonna tell me I’m wrong? No one.

And it’s not so much the fact that, “Oh, that sucks for Gamergate,” it’s that I had somebody reach out to me on Twitter and say, “We don’t need a leader, we don’t need someone to tell us what to do.” That’s not a leader, you idiot. That’s your fucking mother, or father, or your teacher. A leader doesn’t tell you what to think. A leader basically takes what the group is collectively going after, and tries with their skills and talents and abilities to reach out to the press or reach out to other people, to take that movement and actually allow it to grow and become something meaningful, and to effect change in the world.

And some of these people are just looking for a fight, and they’re angry and pissed off, and they sort of live under the umbrella of Gamergate, and they speak in this rhetoric that sounds like it’s a fifth-grade production of Les Miserables, like they’re fucking storming the goddamn barricade. It fucking drives me batshit.

Fundamentally, there are aspects of what these folks are saying … Yeah, of course, there are really corrupt and shitty journalists. And sometimes people who are supportive of what they call Gamergate will tell you that they’re supportive of inclusion and I think that’s great. Men, women, kids, gay people, straight people, transgender people, different religions—of course, everybody should play games if they want to play games.

In the very next breath you’ll see a Gamergate hashtag that sort of espouses a different philosophy. Let’s put it this way: if the people who really claim to care about what they say Gamergate is about really genuinely care about that—and they weren’t coming from a place of ego and from a place of just wanting to fight, and are pissed off—if enough of those people really felt that way, they would actually look at movements that have worked in the past, and they would ask: alright, what are we doing wrong? Why are we so hated? Why are we (according to them) so misunderstood? Let’s adjust, let’s course correct, to reach the goal. That should be the most important thing: the goal. Instead it becomes this pissing match and they just look like fucking idiots.

NG: You make really solid points. It’s something that I’ve noticed. It’s hard when I’m running a gaming site to try to be not one way or another, trying to just encourage the discussion and the positive message. Do you think Gamergate is becoming insular? Do you think it’s …

DJ: Again, and I’m not trying to be smarmy or contrarian, but: Gamergate does not exist. For you to say “Gamergate becoming insular”—what is it? Is Gamergate the couch I’m sitting on? I don’t know what Gamergate is. It’s an amorphous term that so far anybody can put anything under and shout from the rooftops that they support Gamergate. It’s embarrassing, is what it is. So I don’t know if that’s become insular, because it means different things to different people.

And the problem with it is that I fundamentally agree with a lot of the things that a number of the people who claim to support Gamergate agree with, but I’m not gonna go online and go public and [support Gamergate] just because I agree with some of the messages of Gamergate. I don’t want to associate … “Why don’t you say you’re part of Gamergate?” Because I don’t want to be part of a stupid fucking movement. Grow up and learn how a movement works, and then maybe I’ll be interested in having a conversation. Until then … It’s so embarrassing. Have you read some of the shit they say? “We’re not gonna give up this fight!” What fight? No one’s fighting you, you fucking idiot.

NG: The main thing that I’ve done with Niche Gamer and Gamergate is basically try to encourage the developers, publishers, whatever to come forward and try to confront these real issues, instead of just …

DJ: You always have to be careful with that. I imagine most people care about that kind of stuff. It’s kind of like saying, “I’m interested in getting the truth, so I’ll make sure to book someone who believes in evolution, and someone who believes that God created the Earth in seven days,” and act as if they’re equivalent theories. That’s absurd. Just like it’s absurd to say “I have to give the Gamergate people their time to express their view.” It’s like, cool, then I can just name … if you’re trying to be fair, then you need to make sure anybody who calls your show and says, “I want to be on, because I have something to talk about,” they have to be able to get on.

Unless that movement gets its shit together, it’s not an equal conversation between even journalists I dislike … I dislike—not as a person, but as an Editor in Chief—I dislike Stephen Totilo’s work at Kotaku. But at least he has a platform out in the world that says, “This is my work as Stephen Totilo”, and you can say, “Okay, let me put that up against someone who has a different theory.” But when it’s like, “Okay, let’s give Gamergate their opportunity to express their view” … They’ve done such a poor job. And I’m being somewhat inflammatory intentionally because I hope that they see that they may very well have some things worth sharing with the world, but they’ve done such a poor job at really figuring out how to get their message out, that it’s just … I don’t think they’ve earned a place of equivalence in the discussion yet. Because they can’t show what they stand for. And I guarantee you the minute someone reads that, they’ll say, “No, that’s not true, have you read this link, and this link? Look at that.” And that’s great, but is that coming from the official Gamergate headquarters? “Well, we don’t have that. We don’t need that.” Yeah, you fucking do. ‘Cause otherwise I can send something out that says, “Gamergate is about eating your own shit with a straw,” and that’s just as valid.

NG: So do you think the big personalities that were involved with Gamergate, like Internet Aristocrat, and King of Pol, do you think that that’s the closest that Gamergate has ever gotten to some sort of leadership—even though they never claimed ownership of that?

DJ: No. I don’t think so. I think if you really want to have a movement, you should say, “This is the name of our movement, this is what we stand for, we’ve had elections, here are the five people who can go out in the press and represent our movement, if we don’t like how they’re representing us, we can get them out at any time or place.” Then they’ll start to be taken seriously.

The problem with Gamergate is that for every good thing they say that’s true, there’s a bunch of stupid shit that’s just angry whining that’s hurting their cause. So they need to pick their battles and say, “Here are the two things that are really important to us, that we think we should get out there, with this manifesto, with this leadership, with this PR skill, let’s work on those first, and then let’s decide are any of these peripheral things [important], after the initial things have gotten done.” It’s just an embarrassment. It’s not an embarrassment because there aren’t people in the “movement” who have a noble goal, it’s an embarrassment because it’s run with the tactics and the intelligence of a fucking junior high school debate.

NG: I’m curious: what are some of the really inane things you’ve seen? Is it just shitposting? Give an example of some of the actions and/or the things that you’ve seen pro-Gamergate people saying or doing that are basically detrimental to the “movement”.

DJ: Well, I mean, it’s everything from … I think there are probably members of Gamergate or people who would, if it was a real movement, would throw their hat in the ring and say “I’m a member of this group”, that are doing really awful things, that if there were a movement called Gamergate that had actual leadership, would say, “Okay, that person is no more a part of our movement than a member of the Republican party … Like [when] you say “I’m a Republican or a Democrat”; they’re not responsible for the actions of their members. I think it’s fair to assume that things like the death threats and things like that, are absolutely not what the people who genuinely believe in Gamergate are about. I don’t believe that’s accurate. I don’t think most people that really believe in some of the core values are out there threatening people. I don’t believe most of them are misogynistic. I don’t believe that. But I do think that their idea of this corruption in game journalism and … I don’t even know what the fuck they want to do. I don’t even understand that.

That’s where I get really upset with a lot of those folks. It’s like, Hey, guess what? I don’t like the website, I don’t go to it. I don’t like Chick Fil A, ’cause I have a gay brother and he told me all about their anti-gay policies, guess what? As much as I love their fucking waffle fries, I don’t eat there anymore. End of story. That’s all you have to do. And if enough people agree with your views, they’ll put those sites out of business.

But how bored must you be with your life to be going around trying to … who gives a shit if Gamasutra publishes an article by Leigh Alexander, who I assure you I dislike more than most people who consider themselves Gamergate members, because she’s personally attacked me online publically and teams that I’ve worked with … I do not like her one bit. I think she’s just poison with her work. But she has a right and a platform to publish it. If she can find a publisher to do it, just ’cause you don’t like it, or the folks in Gamergate don’t like it, she still has a right to do it, and I think if the public that consumes online media agrees with people in Gamergate, then you know what? No one’s going to hire her to write anymore. But back the fuck off. Why do you care so much? I guess what it is, is that their actions when they tie them to what they claim is the motivating factor for their actions, which is, “Oh, game journalism is corrupt”, the fervor and the vitriol is such that … The actual thing that they’re saying is causing it, is so minor in terms of the damage that it does.

It really makes it hard to believe that that’s what they’re really upset about, and it gives those anti-Gamergate folks a really good platform to go, “These folks are women-hating, violence-loving, threatening assholes.” I’m not saying they are, but it does make you go, “Why are they so upset about the fact that a review may or may not have gotten a really good score because someone fucked someone else?” If it’s true, who gives a shit? Why do you care so much that Depression Quest got great reviews? Did it affect your day in one motherfucking way? I don’t think so.

NG: What recently happened with the whole “fucktard” thing that you said at PSX?—you’re pretty liberal with how you talk. Do you think that actually discourages you from saying certain things?

DJ: No. This is why I feel when it comes to a lot of these folks, I’m dealing with people who, quite possibly—and this is wonderful, it’s wonderful to be a child—who are quite possibly children, who are 14 or 15 years old, who aren’t mature enough to understand an actual discussion. And I’m not being facetious. I have an 11-year-old and I don’t expect her to come down to the table and have a genuine intellectual discourse yet, she’s too young, she doesn’t have that experience yet.

There’s a huge difference between … People just want to paint me with one brush because they don’t understand subtlety and nuance on stage … I’ve never used the word retarded in a derogatory way, ever. It happened after I had children. My kids are not, thank god, not mentally challenged in that way, but it made me realize, just like I have a brother now [who is gay] … We grew up in Alabama. We’d say, “Oh, that’s fucking gay,” or we’d tell our friends, “You’re a fucking fag.” It never occurred to me that anybody around me, even my own brother [who hadn’t come out], was being hurt every single time I said it.

So when I had kids and I knew that there were parents who were suffering through holy shit and they’ve got this baby and this is going to be a challenge for the rest of their life and the rest of their baby’s life … To say, “That’s fucking retarded” and “I didn’t mean that, I’m not talking about kids.” I know you’re not, but you could be sitting on the bus next to a parent whose heart is fucking breaking because they know that their child who they adore is going to be put out into the world with people like you that basically have taken the word that defines their person and said, “That’s a bad thing.”

So when I said “fucktard”, I never … It’s funny we’re talking about the word “fucktard”. But when I said that word, I never put two and two together and said, “Retarded is a derogatory word.” Even though “tard” is in there, “fucktard” was just sort of an amalgam of things that I never thought about. So when that was pointed out to me, I very quickly apologized and I very quickly was like, “Oh my god, yeah, I get it now, thanks for pointing it out, and I’m not going to use that word anymore, in the context of saying something is bad or stupid, because I get that there’s an association with the word ‘retarded’ as an insult and I’m not about that.”

Well, some people online, they were like, “Don’t cave, Jaffe. Don’t cave!” and I’m not caving. I’ve never been an asshole, and by doing this I remain not an asshole. [You can] stand up for yourself, and say what you want, express yourself in the world the way you want, but also have an open mind enough to know that you live in the world with other human beings and you don’t need to be an asshole. So the fact that these people didn’t have the listening and comprehension skills to understand the difference, makes me go “Why the fuck would I take their ‘movement’ seriously?”

NG: Do you think that a lot of these mainstream journalists, that they try to look for that kind of stuff, you know, where you slip up or you say something in a certain way, and they cherry pick that, and then they spin it, and they try to do a hit piece on you?

DJ: In that case, I had a wonderful conversation with a journalist. […] We had a really long talk and it was a really heartfelt talk at PSX yesterday. At the end, he said thanks, I said thanks, and I said “I’m really looking forward to how you basically take this all out of context and come up with a great clickbait headline.” And he assured me that he wouldn’t, and I thanked him, and I believe him, but yeah, my guard is always up for that.

I know those journalists and I don’t work with them anymore. I told Sony on Saturday, they said, “Hey, do you want to do some press for the game at PSX?” I said yes, “I will not speak with Kotaku, but I will speak with anybody else right now.” And I have about three people who I will not work with, and that’s okay. They don’t need me. But I’m not gonna give them the time of day until they change their policies or they get a new editor in chief. And I personally like Stephen Totilo as a person, but I think he’s been a rotten Editor in Chief for Kotaku.

Do I think people go after that? Yeah. Whether they care or not, they’re willing to hurt people and hurt people’s reputations in order to get people to click their sites. Yeah, they absolutely do that. Do all of them do that? Absolutely not. But some of them do. And that’s why I don’t visit their sites, and that’s why I don’t work with them. And that’s why I advise people not to do that, either, because ultimately all that matters to those folks, clearly, is money and getting clicks, and the best thing you can do if you really want to hurt those people and put them out of business, then put them out of business by not going there.

NG: I wanted to move on to the kind of games that you tend to make, the reactions that they get. You tend to make games that are, I would say, kind of more “pulp.” Do you think that any game should be censored? I’m curious about your stance on censorship.

DJ: I don’t believe in censorship, I believe in responsible parenting, I believe very much in a rating system as long as it is non-corrupt—and I think for the most part the games rating system has done a really good job of accurately representing what’s in the box or on the other side of the download for people and for parents—but no, I think games should be able to be about whatever they want to be about.

I just think that the public and the game creators shouldn’t be ignorant and assume that if you want to make a game about the Holocaust told from the side of the Nazis, where the Nazis emerge as the heroes, don’t act surprised or offended if you have a really hard time finding funding for that game. But do I support the right for it to exist? Absolutely. One of the things we fought the Nazis over, one of the things that we lose troops over every day, in America, anyway, is to have the freedom to express ourselves, especially when that expression is offensive, so I don’t think things should be censored. But I do think that people should stop acting surprised when super niche stuff is not given an $80 million budget and promoted like Uncharted 4.

NG: Moving on. Do you think that certain journalists, writers, bloggers, etc. are trying to be media gatekeepers in the sense … I’ve seen it with that game, Hatred, obviously a very controversial game, lots of writers in their news stories actually said “Do not buy this game, do not support this game” …

DJ: I had a journalist reach out to me—“Will you comment on this game?”—and it was clear that that journalist wanted me to help him build a story about all the outrage over this game, and I said, “Well, I don’t really like the trailer, but I support its right to exist. Isn’t you writing a story about a game very few people have heard about, simply contributing to that game getting more attention, when you’re telling me that you’re writing this story from an angle that you’re up in arms about games like this being made?

Doesn’t that really make you full of shit? Because all you’re really doing is making money off the fact that this game is going to push people’s buttons, and you’re going to hide behind the role of being some concerned journalist, when if you’re really concerned you wouldn’t write about it or give it any attention. And he kind of never wrote me back, I don’t know why.

NG: I think I know why.

DJ: Do I think there are journalists like that? Absolutely. And I avoid them. I recommend the same to everyone else.

NG: One more quick question. To kind of go back to Gamergate: what are your quick suggestions or tips in order for them to actually have a real impact on the games industry?

DJ: I think if they want to have an impact on the games industry they need to figure out what kind of impact they want to have. Can you be more specific, what aspect? There’s a multitude of things, depending on who you ask, that Gamergate stands for. Which specific thing are you referring to about them having an impact on the industry that I would need to advise them on?

NG: The lack of transparency and ethics between, say the devs and the pubs and the games journalists.

DJ: I would advise them to find a hobby, because who gives a shit? That’s my answer. Who gives a fucking shit? If EA has paid—I’m not saying they have—I don’t want to say EA because people will think I’m saying something I’m not … Let’s say Big Corporate Publisher has paid Big Corporate Site a shit ton of money to make their game sound better than it is? Guess what, this is so awesome. Once you feel that’s true, stop reading that site and stop buying that company’s games.

What do you think is going to happen? You think suddenly Stephen Totilo is going to wake up or one of these sites is going to wake up and say, “Well, now I need to be a better journalist,” or do you think these companies that make billions of dollars are going to say, “Oh well, you know, we’ve spent $70 million on this game …” As long as it’s legal, they’re going to take every route they can to recoup their costs to make a profit. That’s their job. That’s their fiduciary responsibility if they’re a public company. I don’t agree with it. I don’t want anybody to feel that they’ve been lied to about my game. And that’s why I […] give companies and websites and moviemakers, I give them my support and money if they treat me respectfully, and if they don’t they can go fuck themselves. But I don’t think they need to be put out of business. I think they need to be put out of business via capitalism, not by a bunch of people who are acting “We’re going to take to the streets!” There’s no law that’s been broken. They’re just shitty. I’m sorry, you’re not going to form a movement to get rid of just shitty. That’s life.

NG: Excellent. That’s pretty much it. I know you’re out of time. Thank you so much for this opportunity Dave!



Owner and Publisher at Niche Gamer and Nicchiban. Outlaw fighting for a better game industry. Pronouns: Patriarch, Guido, Olive, Catholic

  1. Ms_Fortune
    December 10, 2014 at 11:04 pm

    ”What fight? No one’s fighting you, you fucking idiot.”

    If I could laugh in your face I would Jaffe.

  2. BigDrulez95
    December 10, 2014 at 11:06 pm

    LMAO! I’m not a fan of Jaffe but this interview was pretty damn funny. Also, he has made some solid points about the problems with GamerGate

  3. Em
    December 10, 2014 at 11:10 pm

    Throughout this interview, I get the sense that David hasn’t looked into this issue. He does mention the very real problem that many people in Gamergate don’t stick to the central goal a lot of the time but bringing up Leigh Alexander and not understanding how seemingly unrelated incidents is corruption or questionable in nature.

    Best thing I get from this interview is to explicitly explain how every post I make is about the central core of corruption and try tell others to wind down twitter drama.

    We don’t go these sites because we don’t like them. We don’t go to them because they’re corrupt.

  4. Zanard Bell
    Zanard Bell
    December 10, 2014 at 11:14 pm

    Well, that was fiery.

    To be honest, David Jaffe really pushed some buttons here, but he made sense. GamerGate is a cacophony, to best describe it. I like it the way it is. Guerilla warfare and all that jazz. But when your enemy is as organized as these gaming journalists, eventually you’ll have be running out of steam. And that’s what I think got to KoP, IA and some other guy that I can’t remember; they ran out of GamerGate thinking it was going around in circles.

    Yes, we don’t need leaders, but we do need a voice. And we need a goal. We’ve won a few major battles, some maybe not even tied directly to GG itself. But we have to go for the gold to establish what we want.

    Me? I just need an apology for the Gamers are Dead articles (by the way, here’s proof that people ARE fighting against you), and that’s it. Then I’m off to Skyrim once more.

    #GamerGate forever.

  5. NuclearKangaroo
    December 10, 2014 at 11:14 pm

    theres some stuff i definitively dont agree with

    ““We’re not gonna give up this fight!” What fight? No one’s fighting you, you fucking idiot.”

    no they ARE fighting us, hell for the very few first week, barely any online community was allowed to tackle the issue because every conversation about it was met with locked threads and bans, then theres the hit pieces, the accusations, etc

    many of the people supporting the corrupt side of gaming journalism are actively trying to silence and discredit the consumer revolt

    that being said i can understand why he would believe some of his points, overall i dont agree with his opinions, but atleast he understand theres corruption in gaming journalism

  6. ZURATAMA1324
    December 10, 2014 at 11:15 pm

    Though I don’t agree with Jaffe, I respect him.
    He doesn’t give a shit about whiners (both #GamerGate and Anti-#GamerGate).
    He is just brutally honest.
    And I couldn’t have it any other way.

  7. Zanard Bell
    Zanard Bell
    December 10, 2014 at 11:16 pm

    “Gamers are Dead.”

    We didn’t start the fire.

  8. ZURATAMA1324
    December 10, 2014 at 11:17 pm

    It was always burning since the world was turning.

  9. Eliah Ryan
    Eliah Ryan
    December 10, 2014 at 11:21 pm

    we were never going to win the PR war when we are taking on corrupt media and their PR companies, they set up the narrative of misogyny and harassment not us, being liked was never the point of Gamer Gate, we don’t care about being liked.

  10. Lenny
    December 10, 2014 at 11:21 pm

    ““Why are they so upset about the fact that
    a review may or may not have gotten a really good score because someone
    fucked someone else?” If it’s true, who gives a shit? Why do you care
    so much that Depression Quest got great reviews? Did it affect your day
    in one motherfucking way? I don’t think so.”

    Jaffer, please. Review scores affect the market drastically. So much so that developers for some studios only get bonuses if their game gets a high metacritic score.

    And in the case of small indie games, getting some small amount of coverage in the media means the difference between selling 5 copies and selling 10,000.

  11. Siveon
    December 10, 2014 at 11:23 pm

    Even if I don’t like his games, Jaffe always finds a way to entertain. Kudos.

  12. Cy
    December 10, 2014 at 11:24 pm

    I disagree with a lot of what he’s saying, especially all the crap about “no one fighting you” and GamerGate needing a leader. They are most definitely fighting us, and if they weren’t then GG never would have started in the first place. GG doesn’t need a leader because it’s doing perfectly fine without one. All it needs is a majority of the people involved to agree on most of the goals and, guess what? They already have that, for the most part. Yeah, some of the rhetoric is heavy and people get carried away with the impassioned, “Les Mis” type speeches, but I hate this idea that passion for a cause or an idea is somehow “stupid” or discredits the valid points that people have about an issue. IMO, it’s bullshit internet culture to jump at the first thing you can mock without ever engaging the ideas of the arguments.

    Still, as much as I never really cared for him before -and this interview didn’t change my opinion much at all- I think it’s really cool that he took the time to do an interview with a non-mainstream site like this when he could have easily went to one of the bigger sites, said basically the same stuff, and had it twisted into a “David Jaffe slams GamerGate!” thing. And I do agree with him on certain things, like Kotaku being awful and needing the market to facilitate actual change. But again, how can we affect sales or clicks if we don’t organize to at least enough of a degree to boycott? And when the hell has a boycott ever needed a leader? Getting off track. My point for this paragraph is basically to say thanks to David Jaffe for doing the interview, and that I respect him for speaking his mind.

    EDIT: One last thing. When a movement gets a leader and a clear, defined set of goals and rules, then that movement has to start excluding people who don’t support that leader or those goals. GG gets a lot of it’s strength from how diverse it is and how many people with wildly different political views come together to stand against corruption and censorship. Once we get a leader, that’s just one step closer to GG becoming the same kind of echo chamber that the SJW’s want the world to be.

  13. Nick_Soapdish
    December 10, 2014 at 11:27 pm

    He’s right in that, if something is shitty then don’t buy it, don’t shop there, that’s it but when shops are pressured to take GTA off shelves instead of people going “I won’t buy it” that’s a problem. Tell that to the people that want stuff banned. You could argue that GamerGate has been more about defence then offence. GamerGate supporters are fine with how capitalism works. Let the market decide what succeeds, not agenda driven media and special interest groups.

    He’s wrong in that if EA paid so and so a million dollars to push something that’s an issue. That’s why the FTC has regulations about disclosure. It is a law.

    I also disagree that movements had specific leaders. Did women’s suffrage have elected officials? The human rights movement had powerful figures but they weren’t a formal organization that held elections to my knowledge (please correct me if I’m wrong). Revolutions don’t always need a leader to succeed.

    David says he tells everyone he knows that Kotaku is shitty. We’re pretty much doing the same thing.

    Also GamerGate is my hobby :)

  14. Creeos
    December 10, 2014 at 11:40 pm

    “Just let it slide these companies are always gonna do shady stuff”
    How about no.

    “Get a leader or no one will take you seriously”
    No many people already explained why this is a shit idea.

    “No one’s fighting you, you fucking idiot.”
    except multiple people have been fired from their job for supporting GG.
    that’s a fight where I come from.

    “I would advise them to find a hobby, because who gives a shit?”
    I do and so do most people in Gamergate you dumbass.

    Jaffe im not sure if your retarted or just don’t give a fuck about any of this.

    The latter seems more likely.

  15. Jon Snow
    Jon Snow
    December 10, 2014 at 11:40 pm

    I hope he at least a little bit understands the need for this disorganization. There are a lot of internet vigilantes that will do whatever it takes to achieve what they believe is their moral standards.

    Take the ‘fucktard’ comment for instance. he had people getting upset at him for saying it and apologized for it. Good on him. Yet if enough of the ‘always offended’ focused on an average 9-5 person making a comment on that, they could absolutely make work to ruin his life. If they’re a student, contact the school. Work? Contact the bosses and say he ‘was making slurs online against mentally handicapped people.’ Get enough of those calls and that boss thinks there’s something to it and fires the person.

    This isn’t hyperbole at all. There is a tumblr group out there dedicated to doing this kind of stuff ‘racists getting fired’. Any leaders we put forward would be subject to that multiplied and I’m not willing to subject anyone to that. I understand the sentiment of needing more organization but we’re dealing with people who believe that the ends justify the means and will do whatever it takes to correct what they decide is injustice.

  16. Mike
    December 10, 2014 at 11:47 pm

    Getting a leader to reach out to the media? When that selfsame media coordinated it’s dozen articles of us as “dead”, and when the mainstream media runs with the “misogyny” narrative because that gets more clicks than an ethics narrative, I don’t think there is any value to reaching out to them.

    Yes, the movement will seem chaotic to an outsider, but even with a “leader” there would still be people who would be looking for a fight anyway. A “leader” would change nothing, except become a target to represent the movement and have the full focus of the media drawn on them to discredit them. Once that “leader” would be discredited, so would the movement.

    Without such a leader, they have to try to discredit a group of tens of thousands of people, which is ridiculous. This is why their narrative falls apart the longer it goes on.

    Some sites have adapted an Ethics policy and include disclosures. They don’t get any GamerGate heat on them because they are at least making an effort. We don’t expect Gawker to change. If Gawker falls, however, then other media might start re-evaluating the cost/benefit ratio of having at least a modicum of standards.

  17. Landale
    December 10, 2014 at 11:51 pm

    That bit at the end kind of bugs me “There’s no law that’s been broken”.
    Maybe that’s true, that’s why we dig, that’s why we contact things like the damn FTC. And in cases like that, even if laws weren’t broken they were riding a really fine line that they quickly got uncomfortable with when it was brought to light.
    That among many many other things.

  18. Tera
    December 10, 2014 at 11:53 pm

    “Nobody is fighting you”

    So the 14 “Gamers Are Over” articles in 48 hours didn’t happen?
    The live interviews on CNN and MSNBC didn’t happen?
    The countless other online articles, blogs, and opinion pieces didn’t happen?

  19. Landale
    December 10, 2014 at 11:55 pm

    Doxing, swatting, getting people fired from their jobs, blacklisting, various things in the mail.

    Totally no one fighting against us.

  20. Someone Else
    Someone Else
    December 10, 2014 at 11:56 pm

    I would have liked to have seen less “So, Jaffe, what do you think of Gamergate?” and more “So, Jaffe, what do you think of shitty websites like Kotaku?”

  21. Satori Mask
    Satori Mask
    December 11, 2014 at 12:00 am

    Remember: Rather than get angry at anything he may have said, the important thing to take away is that if someone doesn’t know something we do, it’s our fault for not properly communicating it in a way that most people can find and understand. We should be asking ourselves if there is a better way to organize our thoughts and get them out there for people to read. Few people will dig through old KiA threads, for example.

  22. Empress Carmella
    Empress Carmella
    December 11, 2014 at 12:02 am

    i’m still a huge fan of Twisted Metal 1 and 2 and Black, good insight from Mr. Jaffe

  23. Nin
    December 11, 2014 at 12:02 am

    I think that the person being interviewed is being logical and honest, though he doesn’t have enough information about what has been going on. Probably because he’s not interested in at all in the ethics of gaming journalism, one of the core aspects of Gamergate and thinks he can simply sidestep the corrupt ones. Which is probably impossible when even seemingly rational ones may in fact be in the same private Google group as the irrational ones.

    If I may say, he is quite naive. I’ve ignored the likes of Kotaku and similar websites for years and things only got worse as time went on.

    Though, he does have a point about us being somewhat incomprehensible to someone outside looking in. Not sure how to fix this, except to politely explain to anyone who asks.

    EDIT: Oh and about his insistence about getting a leader… no, Gamergate is not a country. As for previous movements having leaders, that’s also somewhat off. Martin Luther King did not strictly regulate the Civil Rights Movement, and I don’t think anyone is managing Feminism right now.

  24. Nick_Soapdish
    December 11, 2014 at 12:04 am

    That’s why GamerGate.me and the Wiki exists I thought.

    If we don’t have a leader maybe we should organize something, like a page that just says “GamerGate stands for this” and get people to sign it.

  25. Landale
    December 11, 2014 at 12:07 am

    The issue with signing being it kills the anonymity and leaves people open to being targeted. Anonymous and pseudonymous signatures wouldn’t really accomplish much of anything either.
    When the enemy is the media, losing that line of defense is losing everything. Trial by media is just about as damning as any true trial.

  26. Joel Nova
    Joel Nova
    December 11, 2014 at 12:07 am

    Damn it felt good to be so heavily criticized without being called a misogynist harasser for once. It hurts but it’s still refreshing lol. It’s funny though, because he slams GG for a lot of things, but turns around and says something we actually are doing or believe in, or highlights a major reason why the problem exists. Like:

    “But when it’s like, “Okay, let’s give Gamergate their opportunity to express their view” … They’ve done such a poor job.” Have we done a poor job? Because every news piece out there on us, we make sure our voices are heard. That’s why it’s been going on for three months. Yeah, the journalists have a bigger platform to speak and we don’t, and that’s exactly one of the core reasons why GG started. “Gamers are Dead” articles demonstrated how these gaming news sites actually aren’t representing or respecting their audience. In fact, they’re actually *FIGHTING* their audience.

    GG is doing a poor job of expressing their views, yet I could make a Twitter account right now and send a death threat to Zoe and might end up on the news. See how that works David?

    Secondly, it’s not just about Depression Quest. Or just about Leigh Alexander (she just wrote the worst article, hence Intel gtfo’ing). These are just key examples of incidents we’ve been skeptical about the gaming news industry all along. We found more examples with other journos and games (pat hernandez/Ben Kuchera), hence Kotaku/Polygon updating their policies when things first started. And still searching for more conflicts, even retroactive ones, like with Gone Home and Red Shirt. Heck haven’t you heard of the “it sucks, 9/10 – IGN” memes? Gaming news is a fucking joke.

    We realize that gaming news is shitty. We can’t change all of it, but this has been a great chance for many to redeem themselves, with sites like Escapist publishing their ethics policy, or getting them to become more aware of potential conflicts (http://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2014/10/gamergate-this-has-the-appearance-of-a-conflict-of-interest-says-game-informer-editor/)

    Lastly, “There’s no law that’s been broken”. Idk man, Dale North resigned right before William Usher released the Alistair Pinsof GameJournoPros blacklisting emails.

  27. Meittimies
    December 11, 2014 at 12:13 am

    Well, his stance on the journalism as a whole is definitely “pro-GG”. He doesn’t believe in leaderless internet consumer riots but really, can we blame him? This is the first one ever to have surfaced. If successful, Gamergate can be a prototype for many other boycotts in the future.

    And he’s also partly right. The way we kill off these shittier gaming sites is simply starve them out. And to do that we should simply spread more awareness of their ethical breaches and promote the alternatives who do understand and know how to do their jobs properly. We won’t be able to remove the shit from Leigh Alexander and the likes of her, but we can make sure they won’t have a future career in gaming journalism. Or rather: we will show everyone how they themselves have made sure they will not have a future career in it.

  28. Stark Snark
    Stark Snark
    December 11, 2014 at 12:15 am

    Great to hear his stance. Still, would like to highlight that no backlash starts without something rotten simmering for far too long. Doritos and Gerstmann not withstanding.

    The games market is huge. Without accountability, tripe gets promoted as the “best thing ever to appear in the video games industry” When really, it wouldn’t have passed the alpha stage. But the tripe is placed above the hidden gems, the incentive is now to cozy up with the various “games sites” for coverage.
    This is your meritocracy in action, America. Plus, even when you bitch about it you get shadow banned, or labelled a “harasser”. I don’t think that is something any logical person would want to accept.

  29. Landale
    December 11, 2014 at 12:16 am

    The not having a leader thing isn’t entirely accurate either. We’ve had and have several. The thing is, just like any ideas of the group once they’ve run their course or begin to prove harmful they’re repurposed or disposed of. They’re not leaders in the conventional sense, but the sway and reach they have can’t be rationally questioned.

  30. Alexander Thomas
    Alexander Thomas
    December 11, 2014 at 12:19 am

    We have done it, Videos, websites, social media. What else can we do.

    All I’ve learned from this is David Jaffe is either lazy or a moron.

  31. Landale
    December 11, 2014 at 12:22 am

    Or insufficiently informed.
    He seems to grasp the key issues, but not the finer details nor the successes that have been had.

  32. Alexander Thomas
    Alexander Thomas
    December 11, 2014 at 12:22 am

    From reading this I know for a fact that Jaffe hasn’t looked into the issue at all. He’s probably had a brief skim through it and then made up his mind.

    We’ve had videos, interviews, websites, wiki’s and even a press kit put forward and it’s all been ignored, even by you David.

    If you had actually looked into the problems we’re having you would see what’s going on, but you don’t do you.. You’re ignorant and lazy in your own little bubble and all I can say is… I will pity you when they come for you.

  33. Ten Penny
    Ten Penny
    December 11, 2014 at 12:42 am

    lmao. I’m sorry, but Jaffe’s suggestion is to have a leader to do absolutely nothing… because all of it is useless anyway. I like Jaffe, but you can just sum this up with “I think Gamergate is a useless endeavor and who gives a shit?”

  34. Gristle
    December 11, 2014 at 1:09 am

    Plebcomics gets doxxed and fired from their job. “No one’s fighting you, you fucking idiot.”

  35. Remnant Psyche
    Remnant Psyche
    December 11, 2014 at 1:28 am

    Big GamerGate supporter here. I think Jaffe is right about two key points: 1) the decentralized nature of GG means the other side can claim any behavior to be representative of GG, and there’s nobody to contradict them, and 2) there need to be concrete, reachable goals for GG. (Beyond exposing shitty “journalistic” practices, there’s very little use in just saying, “ethics in games journalism!” How can that be realistically achieved?)

    For point 1, consider that the opposition has a strong foothold in academia. Deservedly or not, third wave feminism–and its attendant extreme left-wing social views–enjoy a facade of public legitimacy because of association with institutes of higher education in the U.S., where such nonsense originates and is propagated. (I am stating an observable fact here, not being partisan. Be as left-wing as you like, just stow your political correctness.) GG has no visible public establishment or accompanying air of legitimacy. Few outside of the movement really knows what it is or what it stands for. Everyone knows what feminists (claim to) stand for.

    Point two is what really seems to require a “leader” or figurehead, because to formulate goals, you have to know what GG “officially” stands for. And let’s be honest by admitting the drives and motivations are all over the map. Some are outraged by the mendacity of Zoe, Anita, and various other “the end justify the means” anti-GGers, who never stop presenting themselves as victims no matter how dishonest and vile their own behavior. Some are sick of the modern clickbait equivalent of yellow journalism having the nerve to denigrate its customers so brazenly. Some are sick of SJW-types trying to de facto censor material they don’t like. Etcetera, etcetera.

  36. Camarouge
    December 11, 2014 at 1:41 am

    Condescending and ignorant… sigh. Disappointing. But it’s not like he actually knew what he was talking about(he couldn’t list something specific he didn’t like).

    Whatever. Hope his new game goes well, I actually think it’s pretty neat. He’s gonna need that luck with this press though…

  37. edtastic
    December 11, 2014 at 1:53 am

    Regarding GamerGate:

    When the public engages in a mass uprisings to demand redress from those in power it represents a failure of those in power to listen, not the public’s failure to communicate.

    A leaderless open movement is the sort you’d expect from a spontaneous uprising. The Arab Spring had no leader. Occupy had no leader. The vast array of protest against Police Brutality across America have no central leadership.

    People talk like Les Miserables because in these times unaccountable power has become a real problem. This all comes down to something quite simple. Respecting the public.

    That means ethical journalism as defined by professional standards long established in the profession. It means not attacking ‘Gamers’ as a community or trying to end their community. It’s uncomplicated like police being put on trial for killing unarmed people.

    “As long as it’s legal, they’re going to take every route they can to recoup their costs to make a profit. ”

    It’s not legal for sites to publish advertisements that are indistinguishable from articles.

  38. FuryOfFirestorm
    December 11, 2014 at 1:55 am

    You’d think the way that Kotaku has tried to smear him as a rape apologist, that Jaffe would be more understanding of GamerGate goals, instead of saying “Who cares? It’s no big deal!”

    Well, when the SJWs fully infect the industry, and either blacklist your games or get them banned for “being offensive”, don’t come crying to us, David.

    “First they came for GTA V, and I said nothing…then they came for Tekken 7, and I said nothing…then they came for God of War, and there was no one to speak for me”

  39. FuryOfFirestorm
    December 11, 2014 at 1:56 am

    The accusations of terrorism, doxxing, threats, and shootings?

    Nope, they never happened, and we’re just tilting at windmills, David.

  40. FuryOfFirestorm
    December 11, 2014 at 2:00 am

    I won’t be surprised if the usual attack dogs like srhbutts, untimely gamer, and a man in black will post parts of this interview out of context (because that’s their thing) and say, “JAFFE CONDEMNS GAMERGATE!”

  41. Satori Mask
    Satori Mask
    December 11, 2014 at 2:04 am

    Either lazy or a moron? He could very well someone strapped for time too, man.

  42. Daniel Pang
    Daniel Pang
    December 11, 2014 at 2:11 am

    Cracking work.

    Jaffa Juice can always counted on to be honest. He may not be the best informed about the situation, but I’ve always respected his opinion because he’s never lied to me about it. Also he has a job and he’s making a game and he’s no doubt very busy – you have far less time to hang around and interact with the community on the internet when 80-90% of your time is taken up by work.

    I am disappointed that he wasn’t here from day one to see all of this go down firsthand, but he remains absolutely right about the points that matter – those being that the market, at the end of the day, dictates what does and what doesn’t get made. People can cry until the cows come home about GTAV all they want – it’s still responsible for over two billion dollars in revenue for Take Two and all involved, and no amount of crying about how you can shoot hookers is going to change a thing.

    Which is why Quinn gave away Depression Quest. For free. She knew how much it was worth – nothing.

  43. edtastic
    December 11, 2014 at 2:18 am

    The public isn’t equipped to fight the press because it lacks an equal voice. They rely on the press to have ethics as with the police. The public has minimal means to resist abuses of power by powerful institutions. The idea of democracy is those with power should be concerned with the will of the people. If that stops happening you get tyranny or in journalistic terms a monopoly on opinion created by collusion between publications.

    The problem is the institutions not the people. They can be well organized and a smug ass in the press can still label them ‘a joke’. It can be a chaotic mess and a supporter in the press can call it the voice of the people. It’s ethics that keep them honest and when they’re gone the people are at the mercy of unprincipled people. That’s the reality GamerGate is still living with.

    It’s always easier for these people to blame the weak and not the strong.

  44. Fenrir7
    December 11, 2014 at 2:29 am

    Wow, Jaffe whined like an angst ridden teen. Way to not understand GG at all. Smh.

  45. Zanard Bell
    Zanard Bell
    December 11, 2014 at 2:33 am

    You don’t have to tell me. I know exactly what was going to happen to the Stephen Colbert interview, and the emotions the people from the left will be having. My political views are surely not with the majority of GamerGate, being a libertarian “rightwinger” myself, but it hurt to see them being deprived of their ‘hero’. Then again, it’s no secret that the entire news industry is corrupt, Comedy Central included.

    That’s why trenchfighting, for me, is what GG is best used as. We will NEVER get a foothold in the PR battle, so we might as well do it from the sidelines.

  46. Gray Dreams
    Gray Dreams
    December 11, 2014 at 2:42 am

    “’We’re not gonna give up this fight!’ What fight? No one’s fighting you, you fucking idiot.”

    Oh dear.

    Actually, yeah, Dave, someone is. Or did you miss the fact that SJW radicals got GTA V pulled from department store shelves in Australia? You might also want to Google “Anita Sarkeesian” and “IGDA blacklist.” While you’re updating yourself on those things, Dave, might you try explaining the 8 different “Gamers are Dead” articles that all just happened to come out on August 28th by magical coincidence?

    Go make another Twisted Metal. You’re good at that. Cultural commentary is not your forte.

  47. Mohammed
    December 11, 2014 at 2:46 am

    I love david and him being himself I just respect the guy. I disagree with most of what he said, but his most important point is very valid.
    Gamergate is disorganized. Disorganization won’t change the world.
    We should collectively do something big like a huge website or Youtube channel to speak to the mainstream audience instead of funding sea lion charities. We should create our own media channels. We’re fighting a war without having media to oppose the propoganda.

  48. Pepper
    December 11, 2014 at 2:54 am

    Yes we totally need a leader because it would mean the journalists would have someone to target and when that person caves under pressure and fucks up once like KoP, everything falls apart because you can put the blame on the one person deemed a leader and be done with it. We don’t need PR for the movement to be successful. Its a losing battle with the people who have the money to twist the message in how they see fit.

  49. Gray Dreams
    Gray Dreams
    December 11, 2014 at 2:57 am

    I think I just figured out what really bothers me about Jaffe’s interview: cowardice. There’s no way the man is this obtuse or uninformed. This is his industry; he know’s what’s going on and probably has a firmer grasp of the timeline of events than most of us. What he’s doing, I believe, is reaching the SJWs’ essential conclusion about #GamerGate, thus securing his place in the industry, while doing so without their reasoning, thus making a pretense (to his ego) of being an I-don’t-give-a-fuck, “straight shooter,” type. I’d almost rather hear that I’m a flaming misogynist.

  50. Chino Gambino
    Chino Gambino
    December 11, 2014 at 2:58 am

    Some things I agree with Jaffe on. GG was attacking the media when it started going after VOX and Gawker owned sites, it was never a fair fight and many GGers are extremely naive when I see them talk of ethics in journalism. The current business models in print(online and off) simply do not reward ethical behavior and research, uninformed gossip, dumb lists and click baiting are far better at drawing traffic. TV news used to be a loss leader for networks but now its expected to make returns, if you pay attention to SKY, CCN, MSNBC or FOX it can scarcely be called informative. Most of the publications smearing GG have no dog in the race, know they are lying and don’t care, its just a slot filler and “everyone is racist and hates women” narrative to sell. No publications are really going to reform, yeah the policies are there but keeping them accountable enough of the time requires more energy than even dedicated volunteers.

    If people want reliable enthusiast press there will be a market for it and you see that fleeing to youtube and let’s players atm. However at present sites like Polygon can earn a decent buck appealing to a small SJW audience, reposting press releases, advertorial, games advertising and producing clickbait. The last thing major publishers want is consumers being shown is accurate unbiased commentary on their products(hence why they love metacritic), they will do just about anything to make it remain distorted(they are working making YTbers/game vloggers their own now). Big changes have to be market driven and If other industries are anything to go by there is no point holding out hope for this one, there isn’t anything to win relative to the energy it takes to burn the rat hole down.

    All you can do is find writers and websites that best serve you, give you the most accurate impressions and stick with them until they screw up.(Good job Niche Gamer, you are my no.1 in Weeb game news)

  51. Ricolfus
    December 11, 2014 at 3:01 am

    Honestly, this is the most important part about GamerGate to me. I’m sick of seeing games get heavily scored because of political correctness, or because it portrays a certain ideology. I think that it can be a valid point, and can effect the score, but it shouldn’t determine the bulk of the score. Polygon gave Tropico 5 a 6.5 because it made the reviewer “feel powerful in the worst way”, because you play as a dictator, and choose to be benevolent or cruel. He chose cruel. His own choice was what was bad. Talk about projection.

    Same thing with getting more press than otherwise due to a relationship, be that as partners, roommates, or just good friends.

    I’m not liking where the industry is going at the moment.

  52. Freeman
    December 11, 2014 at 3:12 am

    Now I’m glad Jaffe got his shit kicked in by the SJW’s bitching about “problematic” elements in his games. I’m guess all this “who cares” talk he’s doing may be because he directly benefited from the corrupt system. Go back to being irrelevant, Jaffe. Oh, wait…

  53. landlock
    December 11, 2014 at 3:34 am

    What have they got to do with Tekken 7? That was something else completely different.

  54. Landale
    December 11, 2014 at 3:36 am

    It’s the mindset. “This isn’t what I want, so it needs to be removed.”

  55. Freeman
    December 11, 2014 at 3:56 am

    I don’t respect him because he comes off as a petulant teenager who needs to fight everything and everyone. He gets attacked by SJWs about his game and fights them, then he goes against a moment (Yes, it is a fucking movement, Jaffe) that fights against the people who tried to call him a misogynist. He acknowledges that there is corruption then throws up his hands and says, “Oh well, that’s life”. Because why should we do anything about it, right? And just because we don’t have a leader we’re just swinging at the wind? Fuck him. Jaffe is honest alright, honest about how little he knows. He’s all thoughtless, formless bluster, nothing more. No one should be asking his opinion on anything because it amounts to nothing but wasted time.

  56. watwut
    December 11, 2014 at 4:07 am

    And maybe gg need to find a way how to get information to those who can not watch tag on twitter for hours a day.

  57. Thanatos2k
    December 11, 2014 at 4:21 am

    Jaffe seems extremely disconnected if he doesn’t know what Gamergate stands for.

    He refuses to call it a movement in one paragraph and then says he refuses to be associated with the movement in the next. Which is it Jaffe? And why are you condescending?

    Jaffe even KNOWS why Gamergate “can’t get their message out” – because the media is acting in concert to distort that message. Jaffe knows this because he’s been a victim of it in the past.

  58. Koroma
    December 11, 2014 at 4:25 am

    Fantastic interview, I agree with some of the things he said actually about leaders and capitalism however i strongly disagree on that last question he answered. It sounded like he’s saying investigative journalism shouldn’t exist in the games industry

  59. Wolfe
    December 11, 2014 at 4:29 am

    Heh. I’m really glad I don’t have an interest in anything this man has ever made. Makes it all the easier to disregard the dismissive, sophomoric answers to real questions.

  60. Mr0303
    December 11, 2014 at 4:37 am

    Let’s play the SJW game.

    Like Jaffe said “I don’t know what Gamergate is.”.

    He is clearly attacking people throwing around terms like “fucktard”.

    “So the fact that these people didn’t have the listening and comprehension skills…” – oh so it is a “Listen a believe” type of deal?

    “the fervor and the vitriol is such that … The actual thing that they’re saying is causing it, is so minor in terms of the damage that it does.” – irony police arrest this man!

  61. Thanatos2k
    December 11, 2014 at 4:42 am

    Of course he’s a coward. He was forced to apologize for saying “fucktard” – and he did it.

  62. Gray Dreams
    Gray Dreams
    December 11, 2014 at 4:44 am

    Good point. Pretty fuckin’ pathetic if you ask me.


  63. Goth Skunk
    Goth Skunk
    December 11, 2014 at 5:02 am

    I think David makes some interesting points. Particularly when talking about how the amorphous nature of #GamerGate makes it possible to browse the hashtag and see on one hand an opinion that really motivates you, and then three tweets later see one that makes you question your faith in humanity.

    I want to disagree with him about the need for leadership. It is my experience that GamerGate supporters are angry at being misrepresented and attacked by those speaking from their untouchable platforms. These are the same people supposedly representing our interests that get to attend all the great gaming conferences like E3 and PAX on an expense card. And when they conduct themselves in a manner that is in their own agenda-driven interests instead of the interests of people by whose clicks they earn their pay, it is only natural that we respond with anger. But having said that, I find myself agreeing with him slightly. Despite all that #GamerGate has accomplished in the last three months, I think it would have been much better if every pro-GG person just got up and left Kotaku, Polygon, Gamasutra et al. Instead of getting angry and demanding change, why not just deny them your attention? Perhaps at the time, individuals were more concerned with ‘Well I’m just one voice. How can I make a difference by ignoring their rhetoric?’ Additionally, it’s much more safe and comforting to add ones voice to thousands of others collectively expressing their anger.

    On the one hand, #GamerGate’s voice of discontent needs to be spoken. On the other, it’s been three months. What has needed to be said has been said. Maybe it’s time for everyone to deny malcontents the privilege of us as an audience. Take our business elsewhere.

    We certainly don’t need them.

  64. Chris2323518 .
    Chris2323518 .
    December 11, 2014 at 5:05 am

    “In order for a movement to be a movement, almost by definition it needs a leader, it needs a manifesto”

    maybe I will come back later, but for now I stopped reading here. Every
    movement “almost by definition it needs a leader”? Who leads Occupy?
    After Rosa Parks refused to sit in the back of the bus and hundreds of
    thousands of people went to the streets to support her, was one of them a
    “leader”? Who was the leader of the student protests in the 1960s? The
    list goes on forever. For practical reasons I only took examples from
    the US history, over here in europe, where I come from, we have
    countless “leaderless” movements as well, enviromentalists, peace
    movements, etc. they all work without a “leader”.

    Honestly, I am tired of people repeating everything they heard without giving it even a second thought, stop feeling smart – start thinking for yourself for a change.

  65. AnarKreig
    December 11, 2014 at 5:08 am

    Chill interview, yo.

    I strongly agree with the last mentions; people simply shouldn’t give a shit about the supposed breaches of journalistic integrity and instead let capitalism run its course. Bad practices are put out of business by better ones.

  66. Goth Skunk
    Goth Skunk
    December 11, 2014 at 5:09 am

    “After Rosa Parks refused to sit in the back of the bus and hundreds of
    thousands of people went to the streets to support her, was one of them a “leader”?”

    Yes. I believe his name was Martin Luther King Jr.? Or am I wrong?

  67. Chris2323518 .
    Chris2323518 .
    December 11, 2014 at 5:18 am

    Rosa Parks refused to sit in the back of the bus in December 1955, Martin Luther King became involved with the Montgomery Improvement Association (that was a reaction to the incident) in 1956, but he remained a pretty unknown coordinator in this comittee for a long time. During the upcoming years (till 1960), he remained pretty unknown to most people in the US, he became much more famous in the 1960s.

  68. Nin
    December 11, 2014 at 5:36 am

    Frankly, if personal ideology or belief system affects a professional score more than 0.5 (Preferably 0, but I can compromise) that reviewer should be fired. It’s personally fine if you do it on a blog of course, but it’s completely unprofessional.

    I mean, it’s fiction, don’t let personal beliefs get in the way of enjoying it. I don’t like cock fighting for example, but I’ll play Pokemon no matter what.

  69. JackDandy
    December 11, 2014 at 5:37 am

    Great interview! Very interesting to read.

  70. daggot
    December 11, 2014 at 5:44 am

    He’s right we aren’t a movement. Movements need leaders and manifestos and although we have a dossier our strength is in numbers its almost like we’re a consumer revolt or something…

  71. Fenrir007
    December 11, 2014 at 5:53 am

    Can’t say I agree with Jaffe on the leader thing. The people we are up against are great at character assassination, and that is exactly what they want – a singular figure to destroy & then associate it to the entire revolt. This is why they are so puzzled at how to fight GG. They see no attack vector.

    Consumer revolts need no leader, and even with our chaotic nature, we manage to get shit done on multiple fronts.

    I also think it is foolish to worry about PR when the very beast you are fighting is the media itself. You can’t win on that front against the kings of misrepresentation.

    Thanks for the interview, Jaffe and Brandon!

  72. Fenrir007
    December 11, 2014 at 5:59 am

    Information consolidation is a problem we always faced, but we keep adapting. We now have a press kit for unethical practises, we have a wiki (that needs more attention, but it’s there), we have gamergate.me etc

  73. Alexander Thomas
    Alexander Thomas
    December 11, 2014 at 6:12 am

    That’s no excuse. That’s like me saying “Someone said that guy is a rapist. I don’t have time to look into it but I’m going to give my thoughts on why that guy is a rapist”

  74. 33
    December 11, 2014 at 6:15 am

    “Why are they so upset about the fact that a review may or may not have gotten a really good score because someone fucked someone else?”
    I would have thought a game developer would care whether or not a review score was an accurate reflection on a game. It’s your livelihood if people decide to give your games inaccurate poor scores because they couldn’t be bothered to do their job properly.

    “Leader topic”
    Considering the abuse people are getting for being neutral on GamerGate,
    let alone being openly pro-GamerGate, our leader would have to be
    suicidal. Movements, operations and revolts die with their leaders:
    that’s why we don’t have one, it won’t collapse with the removal of one

    Plus it doesn’t matter who gets put in front of the MSM.
    They’ve made up their minds and they don’t care enough to look into
    anything longer than five seconds and attempt to write something

  75. Jess
    December 11, 2014 at 6:19 am

    Thanks for naysaying without calling me an x-ist internalising my y and z.

    Kotaku in Action could pretty much be described as the base of operations. It would be useful to have our victory conditions there or perhaps even frontpaged at gamergate.me.

    But where leaders are concerned, we could have one of the diamonds like Mercedes, Auerbach or Totalbiscuit and they’d still incessantly assassinate that person’s character and imply that means all of GamerGate are arseholes. Having a leader will solve nothing.

  76. Viredae
    December 11, 2014 at 6:33 am

    “I would advise them to find a hobby, because who gives a shit? ”

    Well, you in particular, Davey-boy, because your games are some of the most offensive and egregious out there.

    When your games get negative coverage because you dared to kill a female enemy character in it and that affects your sales, you’d have to have your head pretty far up your ass to say that nobody should give a shit.

  77. Chicago_Gamer
    December 11, 2014 at 6:59 am

    The only thing I liked about this interview is that Niche Gamer is getting AAA devs to speak with them.

    The rest are suggestions that sock puppet troll accounts make when you accidently get into a conversation with them.

  78. Cerberus
    December 11, 2014 at 7:13 am

    This article…this a thousand times this…pretty much sums up why im out of #gamergate…

  79. Alex V.
    Alex V.
    December 11, 2014 at 7:26 am

    Must agree everything is chaotic… on the internet…

  80. Wrathful
    December 11, 2014 at 8:16 am

    Jaffe got a point that this movement is hard to explain to outsiders. It needs to be focused. Other than that, there’s a frightening level of dissonance. Jaffe needs to realise, most of us have avoided clickbait websites and buying games that are hyped to death by game journos like 4 years before this came to explode. Even then this social clique movement will grow bigger if left untreated. It’s already infested faster than a cancer cells.

  81. Wonderkarp
    December 11, 2014 at 8:20 am

    Twitter itself is a nightmare of a landscape. Nothing really gets done there except for the sharing of links. Other wise its just trashtalking and arguing. I nuked my twitter. Created a new one.

    Still sending the emails though.

  82. OneClassyBloke
    December 11, 2014 at 8:27 am

    Does anyone else get the impression that he believes there needs to be a single person/figurehead who can go down in history as “The Person Who Lost GamerGate”. It feels like he’s suggesting we need a scapegoat who can be blamed for all our faults, in a similar way to the president of the time being blamed for every little thing wrong with the country they rule.

  83. degobabdub0
    December 11, 2014 at 8:45 am

    I can understand David Jaffe’s points about things being confusing. But a lot of the confusion about what Gamergate is has stemmed from the censorship around the issue. The only people able to talk freely are journalists with megaphones, and they are one of the parties in the argument!

    Also, and this is the same point from September, what applies to David Jaffe does not necessarily apply to a lot of smaller or younger developers in the industry. Journalists have used their positions to bully others(e.g. Heroes of the Storm dev, Brad Wardell) into apologies or out of the industry altogether. I admire Jaffe’s ability to shrug attacks off, but it’s a problem that developers should even have to fight yellow journalism form their own press in the first place.

  84. Mark Samenfink
    Mark Samenfink
    December 11, 2014 at 8:59 am

    I think Jaffe’s biggest Gaffe here is the association of Gamergate with a movement. We aren’t one. We’re a consumer revolt, leaderless, amorphous, and our message is now and has always been clearly a demand for ethical standards in games journalism (although it has now expanded to all journalism). We do not follow the rules for radicals or any garbage that makes “movements” successful because we have never and will never be one.

    Of course, he was directed to his opinions on that basis by a question labeling us as a movement as well, so I can’t blame him fully. Regardless, if we were a movement he had some very strong points on that front.

  85. bans
    December 11, 2014 at 9:11 am

    Jaffe’s gaffe gave me a laugh…

  86. Jas_9000
    December 11, 2014 at 9:28 am

    Fun read. Another dev gleefully swinging on certain shits in the games media. Always enjoy that. Christian Allen first and now David Jaffe.

    Have to make some popcorn next time.

  87. bans
    December 11, 2014 at 9:28 am

    Movement- a series of organized activities working toward an objective; also : an organized effort to promote or attain an end (the civil rights movement).

    I think gamergate fits in quite nicely into the definition of movement, maybe gaffe should “Grow up and learn how a movement works”

  88. Jiří Dvořák
    Jiří Dvořák
    December 11, 2014 at 9:37 am

    David Jaffe accuses us of being teenagers, while he is acting like a teenager himself in this interview. He might want to check some facts before he starts to call everyone idiots.

  89. dasCameo
    December 11, 2014 at 9:41 am

    I really like the interview.

  90. Jas_9000
    December 11, 2014 at 9:41 am

    To be fair he shit on Alexander and noted there were other idiots in the games media. He was talking about the ongoing “fight” as a meta thing. He doesn’t care about poo fights on twitter.

  91. Robaperas
    December 11, 2014 at 10:04 am

    Hey, just one match for Zoe in the comments, and 5 for sjw, you’re progressing kids, even though reeeeally slowly.

  92. ArsVampyre
    December 11, 2014 at 10:35 am

    Why is this important Jaffe? Because if journalists are lying about game news, what else are they lying about? Isreal? Torture? Iran? Take the recent Rolling Stone debacle; would that have happened in the journalist had actually done the ethical follow up and fact checking she was supposed to have done?

    This unethical journalism, this lack of fact checking, is a poison to the public. Journalists are the public’s eyes, ears, and mouth. They’re how we find out about the wider world we can’t experience individually and how we speak back to those in power about what they’re doing.

    And #gamergate shows the tip of that iceberg; the gaming journalism corruption is just what’s easily above the surface of the water, but we’re getting closer and we can start to the the shape of the corruption and how fucking huge it is, how it’s everywhere and in everything, and it’s coloring the public’s perception and stifling our voice, and ultimately allowing a few to control the course of the many, to their detriment.

    Why wasn’t there more investigation before the financial issues of 2008? Why not more follow up on the total lack of correction? Why hasn’t the press put their feet to the fire, and their supporting politicians, so that we can have financial regulations which prevent a future crash just like it from occurring again?

    Where are the ethical journalists, who see this as a calling and not as a job to exploit?

    And that’s why Gamergate has to continue, and why it matters. And because these media sites are so adept at character assassination to crush populist movements such as Occupy Wall Street, that’s why we can’t have leadership and an HQ. This ‘anonomity’ you deride is our protection from being crushed because we are just common people with everyday lives, jobs, and families, and who we are isn’t important compared to what we’re saying.

    I respect your right to disagree, but there is a logic to the way we’re doing things. Perhaps you could point out one of those movements that ‘worked’, because recent history pretty much shows them being consistently crushed or corrupted into supporting the things they were against (i.e. Teaparty now supports big-business republicans rather than small business and tax law reduction like it started out as).

    Gamergate keeps going because there isn’t a single target to crush or use to discredit it.

    And, finally, I see nothing wrong with letting advertisers know why you’re not going to a website they may be advertising on anymore, and where they can move their ads if they want to advertise to you. That’s still capitalism. Assuming I can find somewhere else to take my money, I don’t have to give it to them in the same way Target doesn’t have to carry GTA5. I don’t need a reason not to give Target my money if I don’t want to, and if I want to let Target know the reason, that’s my prerogative as well. And yes, I’m aware it’s only Target in AU.

    So, I respect your opinion, but I disagree on many points. What you see as Chaos I see as freedom, what you see as a lack of organization I see as the marketplace of ideas; freely choosing that which you want to support and not supporting other things without telling people what they can and can’t do.

    And yes, a total lack of threats from Gamergate.

  93. King of Zeroes
    King of Zeroes
    December 11, 2014 at 10:45 am

    “Why are we so hated?”

    Because our opponent is the fucking MEDIA. They started slinging shit from the start. Before we even realized how deep this went. We cannot convince the media to side with us because the media IS the other side.

  94. Megamatics
    December 11, 2014 at 10:57 am

    I think there are a lot of things to consider here, especially if we want to build a more politically viable image. Gamers have been dragged through the muck too much by the media to be seen as anything but monsters. I Understand what he is saying about a leader, but it puts us at a significant risk of having that leader undermined and lampooned unfairly in the media we hope will listen. Leaders are also easily corruptible if their morals are questionable, so we would need someone who is Articulate, Agreeable, Good at public speaking, and steadfast. I don’t want to paint a broad brush, but I don’t think a lot of Gamers could deal in the political playing field. The Greater Media is probably waiting for us to Vote in a Leader so that they can launch a nuclear missile on them. It would be a significant risk to the image of GamerGate or the greatest move we’ve made so far. I don’t think a leader would be in the works right now with the current climate of people against GG.

  95. Keinart
    December 11, 2014 at 11:08 am

    Jaffe has a really strong language but I think he had some valid points in all of this.

    First, about taking GamerGate too seriously. I think people should take GamerGate however they want but it’s true some people will cherry pick and try to spin anything in their favor. If you talk to much about Leight Alexander and their shitty articles people would take that out of context and say “you are just a misogynist asshole!”, and they may be wrong but people will just listen and believe whatever they want, and there’s not a single thing that cannot be taken out of context. It that way I Jaffe is right, people shouldn’t focus so much in certain people because that would only hurt themselves, is not good if the other side creates a martyr, but at the same time I think thay anything can be taken out of context, so if all this exaggerated narrative with “take out the enemy” or “let’s keep this fight” manages to keep some individuals motivated to keep trying and bring some light in all of this, then it’s welcome. Childish, sure, but at least someone is denouncing the corruption and the shitty articles journos have been living off for years.

    Now, about GamerGate not having a leader. Yes it’s true, anyone can say anything about it and every little thing is GamerGate because no one can tell you otherwise, but that I think is the main point that almost no one have not realized: GAMERGATE IS A CHANNEL.

    I mean, it’s just a hashtag, and people has been using that hashtag just because Adam Baldwin used it so it was the more famous. I’m pretty sure this would have come too if some other famous people used it for any other case of corruption or anything. #GamerGate is what people use to name this movement or consumer revolt just because is what more people know about, but it doesn’t mean GamerGate is anything at all. GamerGate is just like mail or phones, is just the medium people use to communicate to talk about issues, some about ethics, some about feminism, some for trolling, anyone can use it any way they want and that’s perfectly fine. GamerGate is just there so people can group togehter different issues and learn about it, and basically most of us have started following a lot of new people and create our own network of information thanks to the hashtag, and that’s basically it. Thanks to this new information now I know more about the corruption some sites would try to hide and not give them a single click, and at the same time I would know about some new sites like NicheGamer thanks to GamerGate. Jeff talks about how if you don’t like something just don’t use it, and I totally approve that view of him, but how can I know where or where not to go if I don’t get info first? That’s what GamerGate is about, information, it’s a channel where information flows from one way to another, there’s a lot of junk, there’s a lot of trolling, there’s even misogyny, of course there’s, but the same way I have tons of spam about viagra in my email account, it’s an inevitable consecuence of communication, there’s going to be a couple of things I won’t like it.

    For me, the main issue is how people want to stop this discussion, how people want to shut down this channel. What’s the issue with letting people TALK? Even if it’s about the most morbid thing free speech is there for everyone, and you can’t shut down one entire channel just because some trolls. Report the trolls, denounce the haters, but don’t make innocent people pay for what others do. And if you want to keep yourself out of this then keep quiet, because when you talk expect someone to respond.

    Now, for some people GamerGate would probably be more than a channel and everything. That’s also ok, you see, GamerGate is just a word, a way to communicate with people, and even if it may be confusing or weird because no one knows what is going on, at the end of the day, only those with the will to know will listen to what people really want to communicate. It could be made better? Sure, but chaos is part of humanity, so let’s learn to accept some of the bullshit we come across, ok?

  96. Joseph Guzman
    Joseph Guzman
    December 11, 2014 at 11:35 am

    While I don’t agree with most of what he had to say, he does bring up some good points.

  97. Ninjagai
    December 11, 2014 at 12:01 pm

    It’s clear Jaffe is willing to bend over and let puritans and marxists fuck him. He should be raging at the GTA5 getting pulled from store shelves. Instead, he’s talking about tone policing and dismissing GamerGate. Complete coward.

  98. Jack Friday
    Jack Friday
    December 11, 2014 at 12:17 pm

    Exactly. And what about this “equality” word that I see thrown around so fucking much? If the game had merit than it would have been able to succeed without contrivance.

    Because Depression Quest lacks artistic integrity, it never should have gotten a greenlight, and it should never have been featured on Steam instead of the other titles made by hard working men and women with actual integrity!

    ZQ was playing up the female persecution card from the very beginning, and just the fact that someone can exploit gender politics for purposes of self-promotion and then censor the criticism DOES AFFECT MY DAY.

  99. Jack Friday
    Jack Friday
    December 11, 2014 at 12:23 pm

    “But when it’s like, “Okay, let’s give Gamergate their opportunity to express their view” … They’ve done such a poor job.”

    Right Jaffe, because its happened so often. Do you remember that time a panel of GG supporters got invited on MSNBC to state their case? Or how about that time we got a full feature spread in Business Week? Damn, we really should have represented ourselves better.

  100. poofin
    December 11, 2014 at 12:38 pm

    After reading this, I can conclude at least one thing:

    – David is grumpy

    Some good points, some rather unfortunate… what I might call a ‘general lack of understanding’ on Dave’s part, but overall a great interview!

    Thanks for it, Nichegamer!

  101. Miroslaw
    December 11, 2014 at 12:40 pm

    you do realise that reviews are by design supposed to represent personal opinions of the author?

  102. Nin
    December 11, 2014 at 1:11 pm

    Reviews are never 100% opinion pieces. If they were, that would imply that the piece of art being reviewed is but a figment of our imaginations.

    In addition, there’s a difference between personal ideology and personal opinion about a fictional work. The former is a concrete system, the latter is not.

  103. FuryOfFirestorm
    December 11, 2014 at 2:04 pm

    Because of SJW bitching, the developers might end up removing the character of Lucky Chloe, at least in the North American version. So it’s basically more censoring because oversensitive snowflakes didn’t like something.

  104. David
    December 11, 2014 at 3:35 pm

    Yeah but he also doesn’t understand what’s going on and has the Ian “Nazi” Cheong train of thought and says it’s games journalism who gives a fuck if it’s corrupt.

    He also doesn’t understand how monopolies or oligopolies work in this case. Does he expect people to boycott all the websites that are working together on this? They make up almost the entire gaming journalism industry. I’m sure there are some journalists out there that want to be honest, but they are more afraid of offending other journalists in the industry and putting their careers at risk, or editors just won’t publish their articles on the subject.

    The journalists have also done a good job of portraying the entire movement as misogynists and harassers of women. It’s even made it into the mainstream media because you have 3 women willing to lie and blame GamerGate for their threats when there is no link to GG from them at all. It’s a bit surprising that the media didn’t vet any of the women. They have no honest character and have been caught lying and manipulating people in the past.

    People have to fight because of the propaganda. The free market won’t solve this problem because no one is listening and everyone is lying to the people about GamerGate and the state of the industry.

    He is right about the leadership aspect though. GG needed strong leadership at a certain point and it’s probably too late for that. I think people were just worried about the wrong person being a leader, and you have people afraid to be a leader because antiGG and journalists would have destroyed that person’s life and their family would be harassed on a level probably worse than Brad Wardell. It’s sickening. Journalists have turned their readers into extremists who actually believe that GG is out to hurt women in the industry. So some of them will do anything to attack those people and their families.

    I hope Jaffe is reading this. There is a reason that Eastern European devs are looking at these journalists who subscribe to “social justice” and thinking they sound just like the communists from their childhood. And this is where the oligopoly aspect comes into play. They won’t hire journalists who don’t subscribe to their political beliefs. They won’t cover indie devs or small companies that don’t subscribe to those beliefs. They are monopolizing that aspect of the industry, because they will give preferential treatment to their friends who are game devs, while ignoring and trash talking devs who aren’t for their brand of social justice.

  105. Nonscpo
    December 11, 2014 at 5:37 pm

    Damn he came off as someone who is more frustrated with the issues at hand then he leads on. Oh well at least he’s anti-censorship!

  106. Jas_9000
    December 11, 2014 at 7:57 pm

    I don’t disagree with much of that. I was just trying to empathize with his position. But I also think that keeping expectations realistic is good idea. A bloody nose and a returned insult is achievable. A long term freeze and bad mouthing of certain sites is achievable. I’m not sure that more than that is possible in the short term.

    To me the value of what gamergate has done is identifying the players and informing any gamers who are inclined to care. This information won’t go anywhere and will haunt these radicals and their sites for years.

    And don’t forget to reward sites that distance themselves from the hive mind.

  107. dsadsada
    December 11, 2014 at 11:07 pm

    Developers aside, I don’t want to find a good review for what is ultimately shit either. That just encourages people to keep buying that crap which will cause companies to produce more as well. In the end, our hard earned money is being wasted away and that’s terrible since we need it for other things like our day to day expenses.

    To be quite frank, it makes me want to pirate that shit if I can’t even trust reviews anymore. And I don’t want to go back to pirating. I feel bad enough not giving money for all those great games on the PS2.

  108. landlock
    December 12, 2014 at 1:44 am

    It had nothing to do with SJW just your regular stupid

    Tekkan fans.

  109. Ricolfus
    December 12, 2014 at 7:01 am

    I dunno. I think that it could be 10% of a score, though for me it depends on the person and why people go to them for reviews.

    For example, although TB doesn’t use scores, people go to him because there was a lack of people doing in depth reviews that focused on mechanics and gameplay. Inversely, if there was a popular reviewer that focused on the other side of games, the story, then having a person’s ideology, in my personal opinion, can be okay if kept to a limit.

    Although, my examples are more applicable to New Media, like YouTubers and such, while not really able to work as well with Old Media, because New does have a level of personality to it, while Old does not. (Hopefully this actually made some sense… I should get some sleep)

  110. Miroslaw
    December 12, 2014 at 10:40 am

    you are badly mistaken; reviews were and are *always* extremely subjective works, based on the personal taste, philosophy, prejudices, ideology and whatever else forms the basis of one’s personal opinions

  111. sHADOW
    December 12, 2014 at 10:55 am

    in a nutshell David Jaffe said to GamerGate

    Psssh… Nothin Personnel… Kid…

    Jaffe is 2edgy4me

  112. Nin
    December 12, 2014 at 11:31 am

    I think that if no one used scores and if metacritic didn’t convert reviews without scores into a tangible number, this wouldn’t be nearly as much of an issue.

    I also think that as long as it makes the website obvious that it’s strongly biased towards a certain ideology, ideology can influence the score (hence why I don’t mind blogs). I just don’t expect companies to take those websites all that seriously due to a lack of professionalism.

  113. Fenrir007
    December 12, 2014 at 5:30 pm

    I don’t agree with having leaders at this point, not at least until we have an alternate media solidified to the point where it won’t be just a thorn in the shoe of mainstream gaming media. We are getting there, though.

    Still, like you said, who would lead us? I can only see people following e-celebs – because, let’s be frank, some random, unknown GG member won’t have any traction with people. Think if you or me were the leaders – who the hell would follow us? (and neither they should, at least in my case).

    Out of all e-celebs, these are the only ones I could see most of GG following:

    IA: Wouldn’t accept and now, after all the controversy, I doubt he would still have the support needed.

    KingofPol: Similarly, after his shenanigans, he fell from grace. I could see him accepting, though.

    Rogue: Too controversial for many people and I doubt he would want to officially lead due to being a dev.

    Hotwheels: Might be a solid choice (intelligent, used to harassment, has the trust of most people in GG AFAIK), but he would never accept it. He has his hands full with 8chan.

    Sargon: Out of the e-celebs, I think he is one of the people that would have the least amount of rejection within GG, but I’m sure he would never accept it either.

    Oliver Campbell: He has a good host of followers, I suppose. Maybe it could work. Maybe.

    It’s really complicated both finding a leader that is both recognized by a large portion of GG and manages to accept the burden. I prfer we keep leaderless and keep solidifying our power bases with alternatives to the unethical gaming media. At some point, we will be strong enough on multiple fronts to not even require a centralized leadership while not being an “amorphous mass” anymore.

  114. Fenrir007
    December 12, 2014 at 5:32 pm

    This. We don’t have leaders, we have rallying banners.

  115. David
    December 12, 2014 at 7:29 pm

    I’d say you need someone recognized earlier but Brooke was a relative unknown that did well in that debate with Chu and that WAM lady.

    I simply think we need someone so the media can interview them and we can get our side of the story out there. Not necessarily a leader. Right now the media doesn’t really have anyone to interview and understand what GG is about. The other side of the coin was, it was obvious that the Al Jazeera interview was heavily edited so it’s possible the media will screw us either way. When I mean leadership, I just mean people coming up with ideas and taking initiative on action. We had a little bit of that at the beginning but people need to come together and brainstorm more imo and bounce ideas off each other and try to spread some sort of plan around. Jade’s boycott of the day for example took initiative and was a great idea.

    It may be too late at this point though because there aren’t very many new controversies going on and the media seems to have moved on from GG for the most part. Any other media probably won’t take GG seriously. The journalists involved all seem to be laying low as well and will be careful until GG is over. I see GG lasting awhile though. There’s a community built up around GG right now.

  116. Hiddin Furpryvacee
    Hiddin Furpryvacee
    December 12, 2014 at 8:12 pm

    The problem I have with the whole “You need a leader to say what GamerGate is about” is that no, we don’t. Why should one or a few speak for all of GamerGate? It’s quite simple that the majority of GamerGate speaks for GamerGate and what it is. Simply saying “this person is the leader” doesn’t change what the majority of GamerGate is for or what it’s like. One person cannot represent GamerGate. I mean, we could have a spokesperson to relay what the majority of GamerGate thinks, what it’s doing and wants to do, but why can’t the majority of GamerGate do that? Why does the focus have to be on one person or a small group of people? And.. those people who say GamerGate is about swiss cheese will still be free to say that, with or without a spokesperson or a leader.

  117. Hiddin Furpryvacee
    Hiddin Furpryvacee
    December 12, 2014 at 8:15 pm

    Leigh has a “right” to say what she wants just like we have a right to boycott that lol. He said it could happen by itself – her not being hired as a writer if people see what she is. What’s wrong with complaining and getting the word out and helping that along? Not that I’m even after that.
    Same with Chik Fil A… there is nothing wrong with getting the word out or boycotting them! What is David Jaffe’s point? That it’s “mean” to do anything to Chik Fil A, Leigh Alexander, etc’s rep justifiably?

  118. Hiddin Furpryvacee
    Hiddin Furpryvacee
    December 12, 2014 at 8:18 pm

    “I’m sorry, you’re not going to form a movement to get rid of just shitty. That’s life.” The problem with Jaffe here is that he seems to be making arguments about why it’s dumb or useless to do so and NOT arguments backing up why there’s something wrong with trying. Is there something wrong with shooting for this, other than you think it’s pointless, Jaffe?

  119. Fenrir007
    December 12, 2014 at 9:48 pm

    Brooke was great, but to be a leader, you need the trust of its “members”, not only debating skills. Not saying she is untrustworthy (I don’t even know who she is), just saying she isn’t automatically trustworthy for getting Chu told.

    Regarding the initiatives, they are all over the place. We just get to hear about them at very late stages, like when they come to fruition. Sometimes, people will organize in a small task-force group and try to do something. It may suceed or not. If it bears fruit, we hear about it.

    One example is the press kit. Almost no one knew about it before it was almost ready. Another example is the collective ebook that is being written by GG members. Digging efforts continue. Individual members e-mail publications and, when they reply, they show us the result. Individuals keep getting interviewed all over the world in country-specific radio shows and whatnot. If you have an idea, present it in KiA, 8chan or even in twitter and let’s see where it goes from there.

    If all you want is a face to interview, we have many already. Plenty of the more visible people would accept the challenge of being interviewed, and having this diversity of faces kinda helps show our own diversity as a group. I think a single person coild be much more easily dismissed and character assassinated by the public and the media in general and taint anything that s/he said. With this multitude of faces, it gets a lot harder to discredit us.

  120. mspoontoo
    December 12, 2014 at 9:59 pm

    GamerGaters should read this whole interview multiple times until they’ve truly absorbed all the the things, and then stop harassing people and go back to just playing games.

  121. Jason
    December 13, 2014 at 2:01 am

    I agree with the pissing contest part, I think a lot of twitter and reddit is in danger of getting too fixated on scoring points against nutjobs and not on the larger issues. I’m also guilty of this. However, I also think it’s inevitable on an emotionally charged issue like Gamergate. Yes, we should constantly be careful of descending into bickering. But to dismiss a whole movement because some people are angry? That’s just lazy and unfair.

    This whole thing started when people criticized journos for conflict of interest, and in return they accused us of being sexist monsters. How do you stay rational when your opponent is like petulant 3 year olds? Heck, even David Pakman was flabbergasted and stuttering with exasperation when they falsely accused him of of the same bullshit, when all he did was refuse to softball them and buy their narrative wholesale.

    Jaffe might think that SOCJUS can be placated by ignoring them and conceding, like his fucktard issue. They won’t. Just look at Shirtgate, the Dickwolves and the GTAV ban, Atheism+, Metalgate, the WAM, the new SOPA. They will stop at nothing. Gamergate is a thing because people have had enough. It’s not embarrassing to stand up for yourself. It’s only embarrassing to willingly police and shame yourself and your own hobby/profession on behalf of SOCJUS.

  122. Jason
    December 13, 2014 at 2:06 am

    Word on the street is that the FBI already know a few people faked their own “death threats”. They just don’t want to prosecute because it looks bad on them. The FTC also updated their stuff due to Gawker’s dishonest sponsoring section. IGF alleged fraud, GJP and IGDA blacklisting. Fake police reports and harassing people at their jobs. No law broken indeed.

  123. kasey307
    December 13, 2014 at 4:38 am

    This person is so mind-blowingly stupid!!!!

  124. Kevin Solway
    Kevin Solway
    December 13, 2014 at 6:02 am

    “No one’s fighting you”.

    I wouldn’t be fighting the SJWs if they weren’t fighting against me. Jaffe doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Is he happy to be labelled a misogynist?

  125. Looper
    December 13, 2014 at 2:04 pm

    And there is. Rock Paper Shotgun, but you guys have blacklisted it for some unaccountable reason.

  126. Nin
    December 14, 2014 at 9:49 am

    Their issue more has to do with the fact that they let personal friendships dictate what they report on. Not a big problem for AAA studios, a big problem for anyone else.

  127. Looper
    December 14, 2014 at 12:33 pm

    Really? You’re still going on about LW1?

  128. Nin
    December 14, 2014 at 1:10 pm

    You did ask why. I’m just saying.

    Though, I never went there in the first place actually, so your words won’t affect their viewer numbers.

  129. Game Guy
    Game Guy
    December 18, 2014 at 10:36 am

    As a Tekken fan I can safely say it isn’t us. We were the ones telling neofag to fuck off with their demands of censorship

  130. Game Guy
    Game Guy
    December 18, 2014 at 10:52 am

    I used to like God of War. I was just burned out from bein a huge DMC fanatic and over the years its become impossiblenfor me to play a GOW game without sighing in disappointment

  131. John Cobalt
    John Cobalt
    January 4, 2015 at 2:11 am

    Blacklisted for banning people and censoring discussion, “not for some unaccountable reason”, I’m one of those people.