i've recived nothing about that. try open something on the Eternal Crusade subreddit, just manage to make it Eternal crusde relevant in some form so we will see what happen.
I dare to doubt that discussing Ms Quinn or person or the entire scandal will be seen as relevant to EC by anyone, particularly not by the mods currently in power. Edit: A nice image collage regarding the current situation on Reddit: http://imgur.com/a/f4WDf Edit 2: A very good article on this matter, reports the current stand of things in a calm and objective manner: big news http://www.brightsideofnews.com/2014/08/25/real-problem-games-journalism/
Even at the risk of getting trouble for necrobumping a thread...watch this little piece. Something is foul in the state of video game journalism. View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TgW5NRUfs44
Your gonna hate this fireeye but I foresee Youtuber unprofessional f tier video game e-celebs getting much more popular when this is over.
What's surprised me most about all of this isn't that the games journalism is garbage, it's that I guess so many people still read Kotaku/RPS/etc? I can't remember the last time I actually thought to myself "Oh I wonder what [x site] has to say about this game", I just go on YouTube to see some gameplay and decide for myself whether or not I'd like it. I'm honestly surprised that so many game blogging sites have even lived this long.
We already have people religiously following individuals such as Pewdiepie. Whatever the consequences of this scandal(s) might be, I don't think they can be that much worse. Edit: And regarding the importance of gaming websites: Those can make or break games, particularly for indie developers that can not pump a few billions into advertisments like the big dogs. Not to speak of their influence - did you know that Zoe Quinn's game Depression quest (which started this entire mess) not only suddenly has a Wikipedia Page, but that this page now portrays her in a positive bias, is protected (even the freaking DISCUSSION PAGE is protected) and that the article for her game is mentioned on the WP's main site? Now that is a coincidence, isn't it?
You know it's hard for me to hate on people depending on who they are who know exactly the stuff to say and the way to act to gain an audience of immature young teenagers when in turn there have been times when their private life becomes very public. And in the case of him in particular, he fits that bill, I honestly think the guy is miserable (and I bet his supporting charities is his coping mechanism)... because when you have to resort to porn when you have a partner, that says a lot about the situation with his relationship, but let's move on shall we...? But then again one could take the stance that when you got dollar bills to wipe your tears with you shouldn't be miserable. Last time I checked money didn't solve depression or make you feel any better, it just makes life easier or allows you to be more indulgent. The sooner people realize that the better. Games Journalism has always been this bad (as TB said in a recent video he made), however... I think that it's only got worse because of two reasons. 1) The internet is not subject to laws that impact on news media and journalism, not all countries have such laws (e.g the US). Thus there is nothing stopping them from making out personal opinion with limited knowledge as being a creditable review. Here in Australia at least, magazines go though an editorial process and scrutinized for fairness and evidence to provide proof of constructive analysis. In other words, quality assurance and to make sure it complies to publishing laws. 2) In the old days when the internet was young or when not all of us had access to the internet (in Australia we never got widespread internet access till 1998 for example) we used to cling to game journalism magazines like a best friend, in the dark days when we were all separated from each other as kids. Not all nerds or geeks were lucky enough to be in schools where there was more than one or two of us in each year group and more often than not we were ignorant of each others existence to begin with. When your only friend is the fictional projection of the people who wrote the articles and reviews in the magazines being as those who cared about you as much as your projected vision of the developers who made those games, then your opinion and Nostalgia of those times is warped by that misguided childish childhood memory. In reality often they used to be even less professionally then than now, knew less about games then than now and overall often were free to write things which could now be considered either sexist, racist or foul. The major difference between them and now is, then they needed a degree to get the job. Now you don't for a website; Then they were interested in saying things that were awesome and shocking, presenting themselves in a friendly way to help you find what they wrote interesting and incite you into purchasing the mag. Now they write stuff which reflects trending viewpoints of the community in an attempt to "click bait" people into their articles so those ads on the sidebar of the website would generate them more revenue. A magazine makes ad money regardless if you buy it or not. A website only makes it based on view count. Also more to the point, in those days... journalists were separated from developers on the grounds that in the 90s and 2000s... developers operated as teams, they were companies. They consisted of several people or more, even if independent. Before that time individuals who made games worked under the umbrella of a corporation (and that continues to this day in the case of consoles), this put a firewall up intentionally between developers and journalists for many reasons. Come the rise of indie devs who operate on a personal level, buddy buddy friend friend rather than work colleges at work and friends outside of work and kept work and personal separate, allowed things like what have been revealed to happen.
