VG247 pulls support and coverage of GOG.com following pro GamerGate tweet [Update: GOG apology]

Deleted member 888 · Jul 20, 2018

Stop It said:
With respect what the hell are you going on about.

It's not a conspiracy theory to say that the posting was a not so subtle dig at gaming journalism, the PR person said as much.

You can defend the right to criticise whoever you like, including part of your own industry but that doesn't preclude criticism. You're conflating people unhappy with the PR response with people making up...what exactly?

So please, outside of this please point towards any conspiracy theories posted here considering you're decrying them here.

You keep on saying about hypothesis not meeting reality yet you make a huge amount of assumption to get there, including what has actually been said officially.

Tell me, if everyone who see the bad side in posting such an image is wrong, what is the positive argument for posting it?

Yes, there does appear to be two issues here. People who still think it's GG related, or expanded on, how could it be possible someone at GOG didn't know this was GG related? So believing the apology is false/a lie/not the full story.

Then yourself wanting a second apology and stating it's unacceptable to joke about/attack gaming journalism [outside of GG].

I'll concede that the second point is a value judgement and a moralistic one, not necessarily conspiratorial thinking that GOG is lying about not knowing they were posting something GG related.

A positive argument? Depends how moralistic you get over a trashy offensive piece of content and whether or not one should ever advertise something which exists for the sole purpose of drama/being offensive? Is your main beef that it was about gaming journalists and GOG is a gaming company? Or would you hold the same views that GOG shouldn't advertise a game mocking/ridiculing political journalists?

Wowfunhappy · Jul 20, 2018

Heroin Cat said:
I appreciate the apology, but it was a deliberate move to write Games journalism on that pic. I don't buy it that it went over their heads. Whomever made the pic knew what they were doing given that GOG has never had any issues with game journos and most of the time acts professional like a company should. The question is whether someone okayed the tweet or if it was just typed and posted.

Journalism isn't such a fragile industry as you're making it out to be. If the grave was calling out a specific journalist* or even a specific outlet, that would be one thing, but it wasn't.

*Well, it was calling a specific person out, but that's the non-obvious part that GoG says they missed.

Gestault · Jul 20, 2018

Audioboxer said:
Cynicism can take over you and cause you to permanently view the world around you as being out to get you. It's in everyone's best interests to always try and keep a clear head and react to things both proportionately and honestly. When news like this breaks conclusions can be considered, as often what looks to be the case can end up being the case. But when answers or facts come down the line then people need the intellectual honesty to realign positions when it is probable their initial conclusion or hypothesis doesn't line up with reality.

Failure to attempt to reshift your outlook on a consistent basis is often what can lead to on-going conspiratorial thinking. No matter what conclusion or hypothesis you hold, you have to find a way to make that the reality, even if what is the reality isn't quite gelling with your personal views.

So here's a distinction worth pointing out for the situation here: There is a stated/ongoing conspiracy in the situation surrounding GG. The "harm" of a possible false-positive is as benign as not listening to an individual on the internet [acting superficially similar to a member of the hate group] or not shopping at a given retailer [that appears to take part in subtrifuge around that hate group].

I'm saying this as one who thinks the GoG Tweet was an honest mistake, but you're expanding this "you can't assume there's a conspiracy" in the presence of one broadly enough to be an almost malignant sentiment. You're producing a large number of theoreticals to try to drown out what are completely valid responses to this specific event. Even reading this situation as carelessness on GoG's part still requires you to recognize that they shared GG materials. This isn't an imaginary threat that people are responding to, and people are perfectly in their rights to have as much or as little patience for seeing that as they like. And that's even before you take the wider political environment into account, which people can have an adjacent set of reactions to. Even putting aside the GG element, THAT aspect was deliberately included.

Deleted member 888 · Jul 20, 2018

Gestault said:
So here's a distinction worth pointing out for the situation here: There is a stated/ongoing conspiracy in the situation surrounding GG. The potential "harm" of assigning a false-positive around it is as benign as not listening to an individual on the internet [superficially similar to the actions of the hate group] or not shopping at a given retailer [that appears to take part in subtrifuge around that hate group].

I'm saying this as one who thinks the GoG Tweet was an honest mistake, but you're expanding this "you can't assume there's a conspiracy" in the presence of one broadly enough to be an almost malignant sentiment. You're producing a large number of theoreticals to try to drown out what are completely valid responses. Even reading this situation as carelessness on GoG's part still requires you to recognize that they shared GG materials. This isn't an imaginary threat that people are responding to, and people are perfectly in their rights to have as much or as little patience for seeing that as they like.

Assigning a false-positive when you only have instinct and past incidents to go on is one thing. I said as much. I don't see people as being wrong for going to the conclusions they did as the story broke.

My disappointment is when people cannot realign initial views when evidence comes down the line that clashes with what their initial feelings were.

I do recognize they shared GG materials. I never denied that. Their response was to remove it when it was brought to them and explain how they didn't pick up on it. Just the same as Bungie released armour in Destiny 2 that no one really picked up on until it was pointed out it looks like KEK. Different scenarios, but two mistakes with a plausible reason given for how they came about.

Stop It · Jul 20, 2018

Audioboxer said:
Assigning a false-positive when you only have instinct and past incidents to go on is one thing. I said as much. I don't see people as being wrong for going to the conclusions they did as the story broke.

My disappointment is when people cannot realign initial views when evidence comes down the line that clashes with what their initial feelings were.

I do recognize they shared GG materials. I never denied that. Their response was to remove it when it was brought to hem and explain how they didn't pick up on it. Just the same as Bungie released armour in Destiny 2 that no one really picked up on until it was pointed out it looks like KEK.

Who here hasn't?

Seriously, you're accusing people of behaviour that isn't happening here.

I have not seen any hint that people still think that GoG posted this in sympathies to GG after their explanation.

Deleted member 888 · Jul 20, 2018

Stop It said:
Who here hasn't?

Seriously, you're accusing people of behaviour that isn't happening here.

I have not seen any hint that people still think that GoG posted this in sympathies to GG after their explanation.

Steve is a poster who has directly responded to me, so I'm sure he won't mind me linking to his post on the last page - https://www.resetera.com/posts/10589339/

I'm not entirely convinced that this was a completely innocent mistake

As for others, I'm not doing a mass quote "call out". Here's where GOG directly responded on Era - https://www.resetera.com/posts/10557998/ You can read from there on yourself for posts that you want as evidence for being suspect around the apology itself.

Heck, the post directly after that says they don't buy the ignorance claim.

Gestault · Jul 20, 2018

Audioboxer said:
Assigning a false-positive when you only have instinct and past incidents to go on is one thing. I said as much. I don't see people as being wrong for going to the conclusions they did as the story broke.

My disappointment is when people cannot realign initial views when evidence comes down the line that clashes with what their initial feelings were.

I do recognize they shared GG materials. I never denied that. Their response was to remove it when it was brought to them and explain how they didn't pick up on it. Just the same as Bungie released armour in Destiny 2 that no one really picked up on until it was pointed out it looks like KEK. Different scenarios, but two mistakes with a plausible reason given for how they came about.

Just to help you get the situation, this was my response to what happened with GoG here:

Gestault said:
I appreciate the specificity in the apology. That wasn't a half-apology, and it's very up-front in the detail that was overlooked, without becoming a billboard for the hate movement behind it. I assume whoever made the post did it intentionally, but it's reasonable to think that person will have a closer set of eyes on them regardless, the same way others will (rightfully) be taking a closer look at GOG's overall communications.

That was the extent of it. This was actually a lot of the reactions I saw from others, as well. But I'm reading your sequence of posts, and disagreeing with what you're saying in the response to what happened. Whether you're arguing to argue or to say something further, I'm not sure. I don't know if you read one or two more potent posts previously (or elsewhere?) and are reacting to those, but the bulk of people you're talking with on the last several page aren't saying the things you think they are.

It seems like you're arguing that people shouldn't assume a defensive/offensive stance in response to the obvious hallmarks of this several-years-old hate movement.

Deleted member 11995 · Jul 20, 2018

Stop It said:
Who here hasn't?

Seriously, you're accusing people of behaviour that isn't happening here.

I have not seen any hint that people still think that GoG posted this in sympathies to GG after their explanation.

To be fair, there have been replies, after the apology, expressing cynicism. I posted one of them myself (stating that GoG have earned the side-eye from me, for now).

My argument with Audioboxer was that I think that's a fair reaction, in this day and age and considering the specific subject we're discussing here (GG).

Edit: Beaten to it.

Stop It · Jul 20, 2018

Audioboxer said:
Steve is a poster who has directly responded to me, so I'm sure he won't mind me linking to his post on the last page - https://www.resetera.com/posts/10589339/

As for others, I'm not doing a mass quote "call out". Here's where GOG directly responded on Era - https://www.resetera.com/posts/10557998/ You can read from there on yourself for posts that you want as evidence for being suspect around the apology itself.

That's not a conspiracy theory with all due respect.

That's taking the view that at face value someone has apologised because they've been caught.

It is however a negative viewpoint, but again, when you only have someone's word to go by, it takes an incredibly naive viewpoint to just accept it without question when their actions preceding it were of a dubious nature.

To Steve above: Stating that you're not convinced by an apology is perfectly acceptable and not a conspiracy theory. I have no idea why skeptical views on it can be cast as such other than to try to discredit legitmate debate that a poster doesn't want to entertain.

Shmunter · Jul 20, 2018

Is that game somehow blacklisted? Because if not, than as distasteful as it may be, a game site promoting a game based on the games imagery may be a lesser infraction; guilty of stupidity

Deleted member 888 · Jul 20, 2018

Gestault said:
Just to help you get the situation, this was my response to what happened with GoG here:

That was the extent of it. This was actually a lot of the reactions I saw from others, as well. But I'm reading your sequence of posts, and disagreeing with what you're saying in the response to what happened. Whether you're arguing to argue or to say something further, I'm not sure. I don't know if you read one or two more potent posts previously (or elsewhere?) and are reacting to those, but the bulk of people you're talking with on the last several page aren't saying the things you think they are.

You did say

I assume whoever made the post did it intentionally

Okay so, that's fair enough, but sometimes that isn't the case. This isn't quite the same as PlayAsia or whoever it was outright supporting GG and doubling down on it. I will presume GOGs twitter account and CDProject Red's will now have been 100% searched.

People will and can use past evidence to imply suspicion over how earnest communication is. I just don't think it's healthy to seemingly be locked in a cycle where you are permanently cynical. Mistakes can and do happen.

Stop It said:
That's not a conspiracy theory with all due respect.

That's taking the view that at face value someone has apologised because they've been caught.

It is however a negative viewpoint, but again, when you only have someone's word to go by, it takes an incredibly naive viewpoint to just accept it without question when their actions preceding it were of a dubious nature.

But they did apologise because they've been caught? They stated as much. Once the community reported to them what they had done they listened and reacted accordingly.

I don't know how big the reddit topic is, as I haven't seen it, but this Resetera topic is *probably* the largest discussion on this versus other gaming forums (in terms of replies/comments). So yeah, they asked Konrad (or he decided himself) to go to both Reddit and here to interact directly with the communities calling them out. That's going just a little further than "generic PR response 101".

Mistwalker · Jul 20, 2018

Stop It said:
With respect what the hell are you going on about.

It's not a conspiracy theory to say that the posting was a not so subtle dig at gaming journalism, the PR person said as much.

You can defend the right to criticise whoever you like, including part of your own industry but that doesn't preclude criticism. You're conflating people unhappy with the PR response with people making up...what exactly?

It seems you're taking the comments as aimed at you, when I believe the frustration is at posters who decided GOG could not have possibly have not fully known the connotations of their tweet, that they must have known about the GG connection, and in particular, a number of posters who refused to reconsider their guilty verdicts even after the apology tweet and message here from GOG clarifying what happened.

And while some folks are upset merely at the imagery or ostensible attack on games journalism, most of this thread and the outrage stemmed from its connections to GG, and how inconceivable it is that a gaming storefront could possibly not know better, again, even after the staffer from GOG themselves popped in to explain.

In other words, despite understandable outrage at a GG reference being posted by a major gaming site, there is also some frustration at how, to many of those outraged, GOG is then not allowed to have simply made a mistake. Cynicism is one thing, and after all the crap GG and hate groups have done, it's hardly unwarranted. But sometimes the simple explanation, that it was an honest (if ignorant and poorly conceived) mistake, is all that there is to it.

Obviously if you want to be upset about the image GOG chose from the publisher and the perceived attack on games journalism specifically...I don't see the malice in it some others obviously do, but it's certainly your right to be upset about it. It's trash from a trash game that was trying too hard to be edgy when it came out, and that obviously hasn't changed. GOG totally misread it and admitted as much.

Gestault · Jul 20, 2018

Mistwalker said:
Obviously if you want to be upset about the image GOG chose from the publisher and the perceived attack on games journalism specifically...I don't see the malice in it some others obviously do, but it's certainly your right to be upset about it.

[Image of gravestone for "Games Journalism," being pissed on]

"Perceived." That's quite the understated read on things.

And the Tweet's added sales language celebrates the game's lack of filter in the same breath as the site's central positive selling point of no DRM. Warm language about "wearing it's [NSFW] heart on its sleeve."

Deleted member 11995 · Jul 20, 2018

I guess for me personally it's just too neat that this was totally innocent and just so happened, you know what I mean?

My bullshit radar goes berserk when these kind of completely unintentional events just pop into existence. It's like other people mentioned earlier, for example, about the date on the tombstone. Nobody involved thought to ask Google real quick if that date meant anything? Well imagine that.

But, again, maybe I'm way off base with this one. Actually, that would be the best outcome. So I swallow my cynicism and accept the apology, and hopefully that's the end of it.

Mistwalker · Jul 20, 2018

Gestault said:
[Image of gravestone for "Games Journalism," being pissed on]

"Perceived." That's quite the understated read on things. And the added sales language celebrates the game's lack of filter in the same breath as the site's central positive selling point of no DRM.

Don't get me wrong, the image is clearly a middle finger at games journalists. The Postal 2 team that created it likely meant it more as a GG reference than a genuine assault on the gaming press--or quite possibly both--and it doesn't really matter because it's shitty and unforgivable either way.

However, I personally don't think GOG meant it as an attack on games journalism or journalists, just as PR for a game whose claim to fame is trash and was slammed by gaming outlets. Maybe I'm being way too naive regarding GOG in assuming their innocence through ignorance here, but again, I'd rather chalk it up to incompetence than malice. I could well be wrong about that, and it was a very stupid thing for anyone to tweet regardless.

Steve.1981 said:
So I swallow my cynicism and accept the apology, and hopefully that's the end of it.

Like you mentioned above, given the subject matter, a certain amount of cynicism is expected. It's damn near required these days, and warranted far too often (GGer in this very topic "just asking questions", I'm thinking "maybe, just maybe this one is just asking questions!" and of course they weren't.) Trying to swallow the cynicism and hope the apology is genuine is where I'm at, too.

Roy Mastang · Jul 20, 2018

So did VG247 retracted their statements of pulling support??

Those hasty moves are usually wrong and unnecessary

Gestault · Jul 20, 2018

Roy Mastang said:
So did VG247 retracted their statements of pulling support??

Those hasty moves are usually wrong and unnecessary

The statement said they won't be promoting them for the "foreseeable future." Which is reasonable given the pro hate-group material they didn't know enough to avoid associating with both their brands. Given time and GoG demonstrating they've improved their process, there's no reason to assume they won't work together again.

Deleted member 888 · Jul 20, 2018

Roy Mastang said:
So did VG247 retracted their statements of pulling support??

Those hasty moves are usually wrong and unnecessary

They don't need to retract, they said this at the start

It could be that GOG didn't know the significance of the dates on the headstone, but until we know the company is taking proper action to find out how this happened, we are pulling support.

And then updated

Update: GOG.com has issued the following apology via Twitter:

"We'd like to follow up on our recent tweet about Postal 2 to share our apology and a few thoughts:

• The intention behind our tweet was to inform about a release known for controversial content.
• Unfortunately, we've failed to make the association between the image, the date, and an abusive movement.
• Our intention was never to hurt or condone hate.

"We have removed the tweet now, we clearly messed up here."

Patrick Klepek · Jul 20, 2018

I think we underestimate how much of the industry turned a blind eye to GamerGate, largely because it didn't impact them personally, or felt it was "over" after the headlines went away, making it safe for jokes and satire.

Taker34 · Jul 20, 2018

Not sure what's worse, the tweet (even if unintentional) or the fact they're promoting Postal... I don't think there's a satisfying ending for this PR disaster.

EmJayJay · Jul 20, 2018

Quoting myself since I haven't had any clarification on this issue.

EmJayJay said:
So did GoG remove the game since it contains Gamergate propaganda? The tombstone is still in the game am I correct?

MyNameIsKonrad said:
So yeah, I'm Konrad from that Reddit thread. Hello everybody!
This is kind of a spot-on interpretation of what happened. "The game is so crude so hey, let's go with this." Out of the two people who regularly work with our social accounts, neither of us was aware that it's far more deliberate and loaded imagery than just your run of the mill, bone-cutting, piss-on-journalism edge.

I gotta say, what gets me the hardest is stuff like "Oh, you guys took a stance but got bullied into apologizing".
I mean no – I'm sitting right here and it's not what happened, there was no stance, only a careless tweet. The outcry did make us aware of the implication. Good. Now we know and we're better for it.

derFeef · Jul 20, 2018

Patrick Klepek said:
I think we underestimate how much of the industry turned a blind eye to GamerGate, largely because it didn't impact them personally, or felt it was "over" after the headlines went away, making it safe for jokes and satire.

I feel like it's omnipresent. When games like Kingdom Come release especially strong. Comment sections and Twitter are just waiting to jump on any criticism, especially if the criticism is held towards obvious misogyny, racism or other hate related topics in those games.

ShinUltramanJ · Jul 20, 2018

Taker34 said:
Not sure what's worse, the tweet (even if unintentional) or the fact they're promoting Postal... I don't think there's a satisfying ending for this PR disaster.

I noticed Postal 2's on sale on Steam as well. Looks like it received some sort of update on 7/18, hence the reason it's being promoted. GoG didn't just decide to promote just for the heck of it.

Einherjer · Jul 20, 2018

Roy Mastang said:
So did VG247 retracted their statements of pulling support??

Those hasty moves are usually wrong and unnecessary

Again to quote myself

tet666 said:
Their "support" was a joke to begin with this: https://imgur.com/sef4wBN is literally everything they have ever posted on GOG so i don't think it even matters.

Roy Mastang · Jul 20, 2018

tet666 said:
Again to quote myself

It goes to show that moves like that full of panic and anger against someone are useless. Even if they cover 1 game a year. They shouldn't have acted like that

BLLYjoe25 · Jul 20, 2018

i thought the tweet was OK. i can see how it might be seen as supportive of that movement but i think it is an innocent mistake. plus these days i feel that people are too sensitive. the slightest thing taken in the slightest wrong way can be blown up. while i'm against it...it is so easily to target someone as sexist/racist etc..

gog are awesome and i will definitely keep using them.

nillansan · Jul 20, 2018

I guess it's easy to dismiss cynicism or just plain criticism as overtly angry outbursts or even as spinning up conspiracies when you aren't on the receiving end of the bullshit these hate movements push.

nillansan · Jul 20, 2018

tet666 said:
Again to quote myself.

You can stop quoting yourself as it says this in the OP.

Right in the OP said:
In the past, our site has promoted GOG as a DRM-free alternative to Steam, and we've even supported the retailer with VG247-themed sales on the front page of the site.

Roy Mastang said:
It goes to show that moves like that full of panic and anger against someone are useless. Even if they cover 1 game a year. They shouldn't have acted like that

Please elaborate.

Weltall Zero · Jul 20, 2018

Steve.1981 said:
I guess for me personally it's just too neat that this was totally innocent and just so happened, you know what I mean?

Frankly? No. I have no clue what you mean, other than "there are no mistakes, everything is intentional", which, I'm sorry, but I don't see how it can be described as anything but paranoia.

Steve.1981 said:
My bullshit radar goes berserk when these kind of completely unintentional events just pop into existence. It's like other people mentioned earlier, for example, about the date on the tombstone. Nobody involved thought to ask Google real quick if that date meant anything? Well imagine that.

I can perfectly well imagine that. I can even imagine the person posting the picture to see it as someone peeing in a gravestone and not giving much thought beyond "this is edgy and transgressive"; the date isn't even particularly visible, and there's not much reason to expect hidden meanings on an image that is already quite that colorful. Simply put, people are suffering hindsight bias, where what is obvious now, after the outcry, appears as if it should have been obvious earlier. But any of these explanations takes far less imagination than GoG acting in ways that are directly self-harming (more on this below).

Steve.1981 said:
But, again, maybe I'm way off base with this one. Actually, that would be the best outcome. So I swallow my cynicism and accept the apology, and hopefully that's the end of it.

Again, it's not "cynicism". Cynicism means expecting people to be selfish and self-serving; there's no scenario where GoG's behaviour makes any sense if they actually supported GG. The "apologized because they got caught" is nonsensical when talking about posting a public tweet on the highly visible account of a major storefront. You cannot simultaneously believe that their purpose was to express public support for GG, and that they hoped nobody would notice. It is, quite literally, immediately contradictory.

Also, the more people insist that they assume them to be in collusion with GG, the more it promotes the view that doing so is, so to speak, "normal" and even "the default assumption", which is literally the opposite of what we should be doing. In fact, GGer's have en masse clung to this delusion, even when repeatedly told otherwise by GoG, precisely because it suits their interests and agenda that "GoG was with us, but retreated due to SJW outcry". Supporting that delusion plays straight into their hands.

Remember, when in doubt, Hanlon's razor usually has the answer.

nillansan said:
I guess it's easy to dismiss cynicism or just plain criticism as overtly angry outbursts or even as spinning up conspiracies when you aren't on the receiving end of the bullshit these hate movements push.

Again, and I can't stress this enough, GGers are the ones pushing the narrative that GoG was indeed acting with full knowledge, and had to retract due to "SJW pressure". Not taking GoG's repeated apology and clarification at face value supports their narrative, and pushes people on the fence to believe it's all true. This is a highly dangerous thing to do.

Deleted member 11995 · Jul 21, 2018

Weltall Zero said:
Frankly? No. I have no clue what you mean, other than "there are no mistakes, everything is intentional", which, I'm sorry, but I don't see how it can be described as anything but paranoia...

...it's not "cynicism". Cynicism means expecting people to be selfish and self-serving...

I thought it was pretty clear that I meant cynical in the sense of general distrust or suspicion.

Also, I never meant to even suggest that I thought GoG were secretly a big bunch of gamergate supporters. My suspicion was more along the lines of, "The person who posted that tweet knew it was about gamergate and thought they were being funny. Now they're denying all knowledge because people are pissed and telling them that shit's not funny."

And again, I'd rather that I was way off the mark and it was in fact just an innocent mistake.

Apologies for the repeated clarification. I guess I need to work on expressing my opinions in a less muddled way.

SiG · Jul 21, 2018

nillansan said:
Why is this such an outlandish concept to some of you?

Not everyone spends their entire lives online, let alone looking at social media.

RROCKMAN · Jul 21, 2018

SiG said:
Not everyone spends their entire lives online, let alone looking at social media.

Its true. Sometimes I post and then Real life comes at me fast, and I dont get on again much later. Some people really think that everyone is online all day every day, and thats just not the case.

TyrantGuardian · Jul 21, 2018

Look, if GOG had a history of taking a stance against GG, I wouldn't care the slightest about this tweet even without an apology as long as it was clearly a crass shock joke, which is in line with the game. Unfortunately GOG doesn't have that privilege, rather quite the opposite. They've flirted with and silently given their consent to GG rhetoric within their community. I was keenly aware of this (as a GOG user since they launched with a library with over 200 games on there) well before this tweet or this thread.

If you're in that space in my head and you THEN post this type of shit, then NO, an apology isn't anywhere near enough. Either do something to clearly distance yourself from that hate movement or lose previously loyal customers like me who assumed your company was based on character and integrity. Tough shit.

RROCKMAN said:
Its true. Sometimes I post and then Real life comes at me fast, and I dont get on again much later. Some people really think that everyone is online all day every day, and thats just not the case.

That's perfectly fine, but you don't get carte blanche to hand-wave away criticism from people who DO know better than you. Ignorance is not an excuse when people are clearly explaining the issue to you. At that point you're just refusing to listen, which is not OK. Saying "sorry I didn't know" is fine. Saying "sorry I didn't know but please stop talking and you're still wrong and I'm going to pretend like I still don't know" isn't.

tet666 said:
Again to quote myself

Of course it matters. They are showing solidarity with the victims of GG. Who gives a shit about what they may or may not have contributed to GOG's site?

BernardoOne · Jul 21, 2018

Roy Mastang said:
It goes to show that moves like that full of panic and anger against someone are useless. Even if they cover 1 game a year. They shouldn't have acted like that

Wut
They did exactly what they should have done. Without it it's likely GOG wouldn't have even apologised or clarified.
GOG themselves apologised and admitted they fucked up.
You'd have to be a pretty huge idiot to try and argue that they shouldnt have called it out.

Weltall Zero · Jul 21, 2018

Steve.1981 said:
My suspicion was more along the lines of, "The person who posted that tweet knew it was about gamergate and thought they were being funny. Now they're denying all knowledge because people are pissed and telling them that shit's not funny."

OK, that makes a lot more sense. I admit I didn't think of that as a third possibility between "they are actual GGers" and "they didn't realize a thing". Not that I myself believe that's the case, but at least it makes internal sense.

Steve.1981 said:
And again, I'd rather that I was way off the mark and it was in fact just an innocent mistake.

Apologies for the repeated clarification. I guess I need to work on expressing my opinions in a less muddled way.

Nah, it's OK. In the end we're all in the same boat here. :)

BernardoOne · Jul 21, 2018

SiG said:
Not everyone spends their entire lives online, let alone looking at social media.

Erm, thats a pretty dumb thing to say. We're talking about the GOG social media handlers, not a random average person. Being online and look at social media is literally their job.

nillansan · Jul 21, 2018

SiG said:
Not everyone spends their entire lives online, let alone looking at social media.

lol did you somehow miss the fact that we are talking about people working in marketing?

nillansan · Jul 21, 2018

Weltall Zero said:
Again, and I can't stress this enough, GGers are the ones pushing the narrative that GoG was indeed acting with full knowledge, and had to retract due to "SJW pressure". Not taking GoG's repeated apology and clarification at face value supports their narrative, and pushes people on the fence to believe it's all true. This is a highly dangerous thing to do.

I am not in the slightest disputing that and for the record, I am personally fine with their apology. Having felt the brunt of the racist bullshit that stems from GG, I must admit that I had my reservations as well. I supported GOG from day one and they'll keep having my support. I should also mention that, I applaud VG247 for actually taking a stance and bringing this to light, it's refreshing. What I am taking issue with are all the posters that jump on folks that even lightly question how something like this came about or merely criticise them for the incompetence that lead to this unfortunate situation in the first place, labelling them as conspiracy theorists or as being overtly sensitive. I think that's problematic, these hate movements affect some more than others, some sympathy or even dropping the mocking tone would help loads. Remember, this is a very specific image that serves a very specific purpose.

TyrantGuardian · Jul 21, 2018

Weltall Zero said:
OK, that makes a lot more sense. I admit I didn't think of that as a third possibility between "they are actual GGers" and "they didn't realize a thing". Not that I myself believe that's the case, but at least it makes internal sense.

I mean even if we presume that whoever made the post merely did it as a pro-GG joke rather than actively being a part of GG, I still don't ever want to buy a game from GOG again (unless they take a clear anti-GG stance after this), so meh.

Weltall Zero · Jul 21, 2018

TyrantGuardian said:
I mean even if we presume that whoever made the post merely did it as a pro-GG joke rather than actively being a part of GG, I still don't ever want to buy a game from GOG again (unless they take a clear anti-GG stance after this), so meh.

As I said, I don't believe that to be true, either. I'm just saying it's at least not immediately contradictory. Particularly, I'm not saying it would be OK, either; and if you believe this is what happened, then it does make sense to stop supporting GoG indeed.

nillansan said:
I am not in the slightest disputing that and for the record, I am personally fine with their apology. Having felt the brunt of the racist bullshit that stems from GG, I must admit that I had my reservations as well. I supported GOG from day one and they'll keep having my support. I should also mention that, I applaud VG247 for actually taking a stance and bringing this to light, it's refreshing. What I am taking issue with are all the posters that jump on folks that even lightly question how something like this came about or merely criticise them for the incompetence that lead to this unfortunate situation in the first place, labelling them as conspiracy theorists or as being overtly sensitive. I think that's problematic, these hate movements affect some more than others, some sympathy or even dropping the mocking tone would help loads. Remember, this is a very specific image that serves a very specific purpose.

I don't think it's fair in the least to conflate "disagree that the image was posted in bad faith" with "disagree that the image is offensive". I'm a bit sick of the narrative that believing the image was a honest mistake is somehow condoning it, or being insensitive to people affected by GG. That's not how it works, there's no correlation between how hateful the meaning of an image is, and how likely it is to be posted with full knowledge of its meaning. I really wish that people quit this because it's turning into a bad faith argument where the ones insisting that it was intentional are using this spurious correlation to shame those that don't.

I think we're not going anywhere in any case. People have made up their mind about this; those that think it was intentional will take their business elsewhere. I think that should be enough punishment and motivation for GoG (and anyone watching) to be more careful in the future.

TyrantGuardian · Jul 21, 2018

Weltall Zero said:
As I said, I don't believe that to be true, either. I'm just saying it's at least not immediately contradictory. Particularly, I'm not saying it would be OK, either; and if you believe this is what happened, then it does make sense to stop supporting GoG indeed.

I think we're not going anywhere in any case. People have made up their mind about this; those that think it was intentional will take their business elsewhere. I think that should be enough punishment and motivation for GoG (and anyone watching) to be more careful in the future.

Yeah sorry if my post came across the wrong way; I was completely agreeing with you and just adding a further step to your point.

Also, I made up my mind on GOG not taking a stance against GG and more or less stopped shopping there at least 2 years ago or something like that. Way before this tweet came around. I don't expect everyone else to be on the watch for GG dog-whistling to that extent, but there have always been some pretty clear signs that GOG at the very least had littie issue with GG using their site as a platform. Very disappointing to me personally.

Weltall Zero · Jul 21, 2018

TyrantGuardian said:
Yeah sorry if my post came across the wrong way; I was completely agreeing with you and just adding a further step to your point.

Also, I made up my mind on GOG not taking a stance against GG and more or less stopped shopping there at least 2 years ago or something like that. Way before this tweet came around. I don't expect everyone else to be on the watch for GG dog-whistling to that extent, but there have always been some pretty clear signs that GOG at the very least had littie issue with GG using their site as a platform. Very disappointing to me personally.

Hmm, I didn't know about the latter; that's indeed worrying. I don't use GoG at all because I'm lazy as fuck and prefer to have all my PC games on Steam, so I haven't followed them at all.

TyrantGuardian · Jul 21, 2018

Weltall Zero said:
Hmm, I didn't know about the latter; that's indeed worrying. I don't use GoG at all because I'm lazy as fuck and prefer to have all my PC games on Steam, so I haven't followed them at all.

I was one of those weird people who prioritized no DRM and bought every single new release on GOG over Steam when given the option. That went away completely after GG. If I'm going to be honest I'm not exactly impressed with Valve's complete ignoring of the issue either, of course - but Valve has a ridiculously huge community to the point where they can more realistically claim agnosticism in terms of staying silent. GOG was/is a smaller community where their silence on and occasional flirting with GG was felt a lot more by those of us who actually enjoyed being there than it did on a huge platform like Steam. Maybe that's unfair and hypocritical on my part, and I'll accept that - but the reason I went to GOG in the first place was over (actual) ethics. What else remains for someone like me once they've shown themselves to be unethical on a much more important issue than DRM/consumer rights? I'll go with the convenience of Steam at that point.

nillansan · Jul 21, 2018

Weltall Zero said:
I don't think it's fair in the least to conflate "disagree that the image was posted in bad faith" with "disagree that the image is offensive". I'm a bit sick of the narrative that believing the image was a honest mistake is somehow condoning it, or being insensitive to people affected by GG.

Please point to where I equate those things in my post.

Weltall Zero said:
That's not how it works, there's no correlation between how hateful the meaning of an image is, and how likely it is to be posted with full knowledge of its meaning. I really wish that people quit this because it's turning into a bad faith argument where the ones insisting that it was intentional are using this spurious correlation to shame those that don't.

I was specifically talking about the posters that came in and labelled everyone that dared question what the rationale behind the Tweet was as conspiracy theorists and being overtly sensitive. Given how prominent GG is and how a gross majority of publishers and developers kept mum about the whole thing, you can't blame people for having reservations about how that Tweet was conceived or for criticising the marketing team for their lack research. Most of us have accepted the apology, but the fact that the image serves a very specific purpose and due to the concerns expressed by me and other posters in this thread (GG has a big presence in the GOG community), it wasn't our immediate instinct to just let it go without discussing it or asking some follow-up questions. Given the way that you've responded to me, are you trying to tell me that framing us as conspiracy theorists and overtly sensitive were justified and acceptable?

Weltall Zero said:
People have made up their mind about this; those that think it was intentional will take their business elsewhere.

Did you even intend to quote me? If so, did you even bother to read my post before replying? I don't see how quite a few of the things you bring up even relates to what I wrote.

Weltall Zero · Jul 21, 2018

nillansan said:
Please point to where I equate those things in my post.

>>>>

nillansan said:
I was specifically talking about the posters that came in and labelled everyone that dared question what the rationale behind the Tweet was as conspiracy theorists and being overtly sensitive. [...] Given the way that you've responded to me, are you trying to tell me that framing us as conspiracy theorists and overtly sensitive were justified and acceptable?

If you can't see how you are bundling together, in this very post, people saying that disbelieving the apology is paranoid, and (hypothetical, because I haven't read anyone doing it) people saying that being offended is overly sensitive, I literally don't know what else to say. It's kind of surreal to me that you would assert you're not lumping those two actions together, and immediately after lump those actions together.

A Dog · Jul 21, 2018

I don't see the problem with them poking fun at Postal 2 for poking fun at Games Journalism.

nillansan · Jul 21, 2018

Weltall Zero said:
If you can't see how you are bundling together, in this very post, people saying that disbelieving the apology is paranoid, and (hypothetical, because I haven't read anyone doing it) people saying that being offended is overly sensitive, I literally don't know what else to say. It's kind of surreal to me that you would assert you're not lumping those two actions together, and immediately after lump those actions together.

Let's take a few steps back, when i wrote the post that you initially responded to, I was referring to posts like this (although this particular poster toned it down later), this, this (which was posted prior to the statement from GOG) and this (who then proceeds to play the I am not american card) and some of the posts that earned a ban.

Weltall Zero · Jul 21, 2018

nillansan said:
Let's take a few steps back, when i wrote the post that you initially responded to, I was referring to posts like this (although this particular poster toned it down later), this, this (which was posted prior to the statement from GOG) and this (who then proceeds to play the I am not american card) and some of the posts that earned a ban.

Then reply to them directly. Generalizing is always going to make you antagonize people you weren't intending to.

nillansan · Jul 22, 2018

Weltall Zero said:
Then reply to them directly. Generalizing is always going to make you antagonize people you weren't intending to.

I've been replying directly to other posters, besides that one post and given the obvious presence of people associated with GG in this thread and the last couple of pages of back-and-forths, I thought it would be obvious who I was talking about, but obviously not.

potatohead · Jul 22, 2018

Vg247 and Gog need to talk this out

I personally wouls not have known this was dog whistle politics but I can see now why it could be construed as that given all that is happening

Maybe the postal 2 owners can change that to piss on gamergate I'd preorder it then hahaha

I do think the best course of action initially and even now would be to engage Gog in conversation and clarify intent truly. I have not had any concerns with Gog and negative or racist politics before so I don't fully agree with what Vg247 announced unless they did have that conversation already that said I like Vg247 taking a strong stand generally against anything that supports or might support shitty gamergaters

VG247 pulls support and coverage of GOG.com following pro GamerGate tweet [Update: GOG apology]

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Bad Cat

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Bad Cat

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

User requested account closure

Editor at Remap, Crossplay

QA Tester

Attempted to circumvent ban with alt account

Game Developer

User requested account closure

Game Developer

Game Developer

Game Developer

Game Developer

Game Developer