The big Phil Fish, Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian discussion thread

If he spent less time whinging on twitter he might actually have made more than one game.

I really hope that is him gone - I cannot comprehend how someone who has made just one game has such a wide audience whenever he opens his gob.

the incredible pudding wrote: »

This video sums up my feelings about Fish pretty well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmTUW-owa2w

I found this to be an interesting commentary

Timmyctc wrote: »

Would it make sense if I came into a coffee shop someone worked in and started loudly calling the barista a "****ing entitled dickweasel" and handed out copies of their personal information to the public because this person acted like a dick at times, or because they cheated on an ex or because someone on tumblr and/or reddit went into intense autistic Sherlock Holmes mode and "Solved the mystery of the indie barista" and how they have connections that got them the job in the first place so they deserved the vitriol me and thousands of others were going to level at them?

Very well put

Well I got Fez free with PS Plus.... played a good 2 hours of it with a friend on Saturday, here's how it played out:

"I like the art style"
"Plenty of nods to the Zelda series here"
"Remember the developer in Indie Game the Movie? He seemed like a bit of a narcissist"
"It's quite a creative game mechanic"
"F**king invisible blocks" :mad:
"Wait were we through this door already"

And so on and so forth, fun game, guy seems a bit OTT, no need to hate him, he didn't do anything to you. Also he seems really passionate, which is nice to see (when done in a positive manner unlike in some of his engagements unfortunately).

I'm really surprised at all the people on here that are refusing to play Fez as a result of the Developers social media or real life actions.

If you wanna deny yourself enjoying something creative and fun because you believe you're taking a moral stance that will somehow affect anything other than you own feelings of life satisfaction, then I think you should reconsider.

It's definitely a game that is worth trying. Not playing it gains you absolutely nothing. It's free on PS Plus after all.

Enjoy the art, not the artist.
If Leonardo Da-Vinchi had a twitter he'd probably be a total p***k too

Nody wrote: »

You know I spent this morning thinking about it and the thing is it's not his twitter persona that's ****ty; it's Phil himself. Phil is simply a bully who's not realized he's not as big as he thinks he is and constantly goes after other people with the belief that because he made Fez his opinion is more important than everyone else. He goes after everyone and anyone for any reason and when they respond to his inane BS he throws a hissy fit and runs away because as any other bully he can't actually handle a real conflict and try to gain sympathy with various threats (I'll never make Fez 2! I'm going to shut down my twitter account! I'm going to sell my company!). All of it simple tricks for him to get people to smooth his ego and tell him he is really the biggest baddest bully around here and he should not listen to those telling him differently.

Now people will say "oh but he has depressed" or "oh but he's being harassed" but the thing is depression is not an excuse or even an explanation; I know plenty of people diagnosed with depression (inc. my SO who's been diagnosed with it for over 20 years) and they don't act like bullies in everyday life nor on the internet yet Phil does. As for being harassed that comes with putting yourself out there by bullying others and then not being able to handle the heat you generated yourself; exactly like a bully he can only give but he can't take anything himself...

To be honest, I'd consider him a bully too if I twisted the narrative as much as you seem to have above. I mean, you've criticised him for going after "everyone and anyone for any reason" and then used two of the most notable examples of him first being specifically insulted for no valid reason. In that first tweet, how exactly was he a bully by any reasonable definition? You can call the response abrasive, uncalled for and immature but an example of him being a bully?

Then you link an entirely one sided excerpt from his spat with Marcus "AnnoyedGamer" Beer on Twitter. For context, here's the interview he was responding too. Now, ignoring the logical inconsistencies in his argument, within the fairly short segment he directly and personally insults both Fish and Jonathan Blow on numerous occasions without any real provocation. What you've posted is Fish's response to that and later, his perfectly valid question to Beer, what did he ever do to him to deserve those kinds of insults publicly.

There's a couple of points worth noting here, Beer isn't some random gamer on the internet, he's a industry reviewer and commentator. If you're going to hold Fish to a higher standard because he should be a professional then the same should apply to Beer. Coupled with this is the fact that you have such a person using their platform to have a go at someone like that when they have no reasonable means of defending themselves. As far as I'm concerned, that's the behaviour of a bully.

Secondly, the overall context is rather interesting. Both devs chose not to comment on the XBox One indie story when the press went to them because, as Blow later commented, at the time it was still unknown how the service may or may not work and he did not want to add "information-free commentary." So now we have two devs who are often criticised for having an opinion on everything, not wanting to give an opinion on something because no one knows how the thing is going to make sense and then getting criticised for it. I'm not going to blame Fish's response on depression or anything else, I'm going to say that if I was in the same damned if you do, damned if you don't situation, I'd be pretty pissed off too. Would I lash out like Fish has? I'd like to think not but the idea of me being classed as a bully for doing so? Nope.

The TotalBiscuit bit is, of course, a different story. His reply is in response to this comment from TB about the Quinn story. Fish, like a few other indie developers, didn't seem to appreciate the fact that TB made such a fairly all encompassing comment on the entire affair yet failed to, in any substantive way, comment on or condemn the volume of abuse Quinn received. Now, I'm quite positive he does think what happened is horrible but from reading it, the tone seems more critical of Quinn's use of the DMCA than of anything else. Jim Sterling, on the other hand, had a far more reasonable commentary on the issue here and, as far as I can see, has received no similar rebuttal from any noteworthy source. Regardless, does this justify Fish's tweets to TB? Absolutely not. Should they be condemned? Most certainly yes. But again, does it make him a bully in the manner in which you've described? I simply can't agree.

* Sidenote: I agree with TB in this case, abuse of the DMCA process is never excusable.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I am boycotting all Phil Fish's games and future games because of his behaviour on twitter. Now I'm off to watch a marathon of Roman Polanski films.

I was going to make a crack about watching Ender's Game if you wanted something different but I was so disappointed with that movie I can't bring myself to think about it even jokingly.

Half of the problem is that game developers interact too much with what is a hugely self-entitled customer base. The 'gaming community' is an oftentimes horrible collective that is willing to force people like Jennifer Hepler out of the industry just because they don't like the ending to a game. Fish's biggest mistake is biting back at some of these cretins and his example should be a warning to developers to take a step back from this community and leave it to the PR people.

Personally, I reckon the dude's problem is that he wants to be the problem. He could easier avoid putting himself in the limelight/firing range, and simply make his games quietly, and let them sell on their merits. But it seems that he loves the trouble. He wants to be the talking point. If you go looking for trouble, don't be surprised if you find it. Any publicity is good pulicity, right? Of course, that's gone a bit too far at this stage. It's good old fashioned Axl Rose syndrome. He thinks he's the most important person in the world, and seems to do whatever it takes to stay revelant. That's my take on it, anyways. However, I could be very wrong.

On the topic of those who give him the abuse and smear his name or details all over the internet. These trolls are less than nothing, and are the people who give video game fans a bad name.

Why not have such a conversation here then?

I mean, we've already had some great posts on the subject of Sarkeesian's Tropes vs. Women videos over here, none of which were overly supportive. There were also a few links to some interesting rebuttals to earlier entries in the series and there wasn't one cry of sexism or misogyny to be found.

Cormac... wrote: »

Ok, I'll get us started, chronologically of course:
How come chess-boards only have 1 female playable character and they are an ache-type "Queen", absolute sexist nonsense :mad:

Why are you assuming pawns are male? :pac:

mewso wrote: »

Total biscuit got serious flack for making a very reasonable post. Many commentators have simplified any questions about ethics in games journalism based on this story as "slut shaming" and so on. Unfortunately with so many vile people out there hurling abuse like I said it's easy to lump it all together and dismiss it.

Most of the notable flack I saw which TB was on the receiving end of was more to do with the perceived dismissive nature of the content of his piece, not that it or he was sexist or misogynist. Adam Saltsman of Canabalt fame was probably the most notable while Fish's was....yea. Anyway, I mentioned the apparent reason for such criticism in a post above. Having said that, while replying to this post and looking around again, I did see some rather bizarre exceptions.

I guess what Timmyctc is saying is, what reasonable critique on sexism in gaming or the Zoe Quinn issue in general which is objectively not sexist, is being dismissed as sexist or its author accused of sexism and misogyny. I mean, I've seen people say it happens, I just haven't seen it myself yet.

Cydoniac wrote: »

It's the devs who actually maintain a pleasant image and don't go looking for **** on Twitter who get on well and maintain support and goodwill from the people who enjoy their games.

I'd include Mike Bithell in that category yet he often mentions the reams of nonsense that get directed his way and the people he's had to straight up block on Twitter because of it. The difference between him and Fish, of course, is that he doesn't engage with them but that's not to say they don't have to deal with the same issues behind the scenes.

Cydoniac wrote: »

For all the buzz Zoe Quinn seems to get - name one game she's done apart from Depression Quest. Have you even played Depression Quest? It's written in Twine, for goodness' sake! I would not wish abuse on anyone, but sometimes people use bad press as press to propel their name. You can usually tell if they should just be left to their devices when they're a 'big name' in gaming yet have little to nothing to actually show for it. A lot of attention-seeking masqueraded as victimisation.

As far as I'm aware, Depression Quest is her first game. I've also not played it but I have read very good things from people who have with regards to it's writing and treatment of the subject matter. She is, however, to all intents and purposes, relatively new on the indie scene from what I can see. On the other hand, she got some very good press from DQ on its own merits, she openly engages with people rather pleasantly on Twitter, has worked with other indie devs on other projects and is a female in an industry isn't exactly noted for them. As a result, it's unsurprising seeing her getting decent amounts of press, relatively speaking at least.

It's also important to remember, this isn't the first time she's been on the receiving end of abuse. On both occasions when she attempted to get DQ through Greenlight, she ended up getting some pretty horrible abuse from various sources. So, while I'll happily agree that sometimes people do use the press to propel their name, there's little to suggest that this is a case of it here.

Kirby wrote: »

Going to disagree strongly with that one.

I've watched a bunch of her videos and the points she tries to make are so one-sided and without balance. I can forgive the fact that her research is shoddy and she frequently gets facts wrong. She's an amateur. That happens.

What I cant forgive is the way she see's what she wants to see and ignores any evidence to the contrary. It's fairly infuriating. But there is a difference between examining evidence and coming to conclusions......and starting out with "conclusions" and going to look for "evidence".

I also strongly object to her disabling rating and comments on her videos. She decides to preach, criticise and critique other peoples work and then has the gall to disallow the same examination and critique of her own. Surely the irony of this isn't lost on her.

While I agree the comments she receives are juvenile and I would never stoop to that level, I did come away from watching her videos very irritated.

Quick aside since IDK where the info is, but did she do the amount of videos she fundraised, and in a timely manner?

gizmo wrote: »

As it happens, the latest one just got released.

In fairness, it's about damn time. Her first Background Decorations one came out months ago, from what I can recall. Either way, that's notight's late night viewing sorted.

Cydoniac wrote: »

I think it draws a disproportionate amount of attention for what it is...I genuinely believe the presence she has on Twitter is what drove the game to that point, and not the game on its own merits. There have been many, many games before it in the same vein. Actual Sunlight is another example. It comes across as overindulgent fan-fiction fodder to me, but maybe I just perceive it in a different way. I genuinely feel it's a case where the 'status' of a developer overshadows their games, and it's more and more common with the advent of the bigger Twitter users. I used to get pretty mad over it, but now I just mute the nonsense and enjoy gaming.

Depression Quest isn't a game that needs anything more complicated though. It's a text adventure of old around a very tight theme. I'm not sure why you'd bother to go to the hassle of making a bespoke anything for it, off the shelf components are fine. For what it's worth, as someone with bipolar I thought the game was interesting and a decent effort at trying to capture the experience though it was obviously going to fall short.

Evade wrote: »

I've often wondered when Anita got so much more in the Kickstarter than she was expecting she didn't try to expand the scope of these videos and interview some people in the industry on camera?

Who thought it was a good idea to give ANYONE $160k to make some online youtube videos.... Thats like 10 years salary for struggling american. Absolute joke

Retr0gamer wrote: »

What the hell does pop culture criticism even mean? Just because it's a 'pop culture criticism' doesn't excuse it for the fact that it contains very little criticism and extremely poor research. There's no really excuse it your work is not good even if you want to call it 'pop culture criticism'. All she has really done (in the first 3 videos) is show that videogames have sexism which really shouldn't even be a question and certainly doesn't need 3 videos at least dedicated to it.

Also feminism is fine, being a feminist means you are going into it with an agenda already. Both are different and both aren't necessarily bad. This critique could definitely be done by a feminist but to do that you have to leave any bias at the door.

I have to say you've put your point across well.

Waxing Lyrical here but:

Look at how men are portrayed in games.
Solider/Hero: build like a f**king tank (Chris Redfield, Jim Raynor)
Scientist: Glasses, usually old, eccentric, has a non-american accent
Mechanic: Common as muck, dirty, has a name thats not a birth name "Wrench"

Should I feel bad cause all the games have big strong men who are good with bows and guns and fists and cars?

Man with Sword/Gun saves Princess/Girlfriend.... if you don't like it, go play Bayonetta or the Sims or Civ5 or Mirrors Edge. Nothing is normal in the world anymore.

To review some her exact words:
"Women are the object".... how many games has she listed where the "prize" isn't love/female but merely gold/glory etc? It beggars belief.
"Zelda has been the hero in a game in the Core series" funny how your portrayal of such examples lead you define "Core" games, where's the aside where she mentions the Cdi game?
"I call this variant on the theme: The Helpful Damsel"... well thanks for defining it, for a second there I almost had an independent thought.
"Regressive Crap"... didn't realise cursing was required, unnecessary and simply weakens your argument
"And not Just a mobile or DS release, I want a full on console release"... And now we're picking and choosing what makes a game valid to a debate

The point of playing games is to achieve success, that can be swooning a girl, getting rich, surviving an apocalypse, if there's no point there's nothing driving the narrative. The same could be said for almost all forms of entertainment.

Not once ever in my life have I met a girl/woman who be they very-feminist or not, that had a problem with playing a Zelda game... of yeah, that's right the series is called ZELDA.... not LINK

I could go on