VIDEO GAMES

GAMERGATE 2.0 AND MORE

one gamer's dissection of a problem

By Iris Chang

Recently, a game called Concord has become a hot topic. As a team-based, first-person shooter developed by Sony over eight years and with a budget of over a hundred of million, it was officially released on the PS5 and Steam platforms on August 23, 2024. To say that the release was a disaster is an understatement. The servers were shut down in under 12 days after it launched with the company handing out hundreds of thousands of refunds. What happened? In the current gaming market, keywords like political correctness, DEI principles, GamerGate 2.0, and “woke” have already sparked widespread discussion. Concord, along with its very short lifespan, has become the focal point of this debate. In order to understand why Concord sparked so much opposition, we must first look at what happened during GamerGate 1.0.

Back in 2009, when the internet was gradually taking shape, many people were earning money by becoming internet celebrities. It was at this time that a future “gaming journalist” named Anita Sarkeesian decided to enter the internet industry. She created a channel called Feminist Frequency and used “feminism” as her title and theme to criticize various works. Initially, her videos discussed films, books, and other popular literary works. She quickly realized that it was difficult for her to stand out. At that time, there were not many feminists in the gaming industry. Sarkeesian saw an opportunity and began specifically criticizing the so-called “patriarchal oppression” within the gaming industry on her channel. However, Sarkeesian had a fatal flaw: she doesn’t know much about games. She even admitted that in a lecture at Santa Monica College that she didn’t play games much. “I’m not a fan of video games. I actually have to learn a lot about video games in the process of making this.”

Anita Sarkeesian

Here’s the question: how can a gaming journalist that doesn’t even play games criticize the male chauvinism within them? If there’s no topic to discuss, then create one. That’s my answer, of course, not hers. In one of Sarkeesian’s videos, she talked about a game series called Hitman. In one of the game’s chapters, players can progress the story by controlling Hitmen 47 and killing two prostitutes. Therefore, Sarkeesian argued that this was proof of patriarchal oppression of women, claiming the game encouraged players to oppress women. However, people familiar with the Hitman series know that every chapter offers multiple solutions. In the chapter Sarkeesian referenced, it is possible to complete it without killing the prostitutes. Moreover, if the player chooses to kill them to complete the mission, they will be penalized. For a long time, her videos were almost all similar in their criticisms. Her faulty logic couldn’t withstand scrutiny, let alone convince players of her views. As a result, in her first few years of uninformed journalism, hardly anyone paid attention to her. However, in 2024, there was a scandal which happened in the gaming community and Sarkeesian seized the opportunity.

Zoe Quinn

It started with a female game developer named Zoe Quinn. When she was 24, she started trying to develop a game. After a while she made a game called Depression Quest. Depression Quest is a text-heavy interactive visual novel where the player experiences the story from the perspective of a protagonist suffering from depression. The game contains minimal graphics, focusing primarily on narrative choices that drive the story forward. Different decisions increase a "depression meter," which affects both the storyline and the outcome. Unfortunately, Depression Quest faced heavy criticism after it was released at the beginning of 2013. Text-based interactive games were once a major genre in PC gaming decades ago, but in the 21st century, people tend to seek more visually impressive games with faster real-time feedback. Depression Quest had to be taken down, but this was only the beginning of the whole incident.

Not the best game

After the failure of Depression Quest, Quinn began raising her profile in areas outside of gaming. She claimed that a significant part of the treatment she received was due to the gaming industry's severe insularity, male chauvinism, and misogyny, and her arguments received considerable support. Between 2013 to 2014 August, Quinn actively participated in the feminist debates in the gaming industry. Due to such actions, Quinn effectively became a representative of the feminist movement within the gaming community. Many people thought that similar incidents were so common that this one would quickly fade away as well, until her ex-boyfriend leaked information.

On August 16, 2014, Quinn’s ex-boyfriend, Eron Gjoni, made multiple simultaneous allegations across various media platforms, claiming that Quinn had affairs with several people during their relationship, including at least five individuals from the gaming industry. And among those accused of having an affair with Quinn was a journalist named Nathan Grayson from kotaku, a well-known gaming website, who had strongly endorsed Depression Quest as one of the top 50 best games of all time. Quinn's opponents made a big deal out of this issue, accusing her of using her body to exchange for favors. This belief was further fueled when Gjoni later released their private conversation logs, leading more people to believe that although Quinn had previously raised her profile by championing feminism, in reality, she was engaging in actions that feminists would find most disgraceful.

Eron Gjoni

Soon, the topic of GamerGate was no longer just discussed within the gaming industry; major American media outlets also reported on it. In mainstream American media, this was framed as an issue stemming from male players and game developers discriminating against female players and developers, portraying it as a gender conflict at its core. At the same time, Sarkeesian to know great surprise noticed Quinn’s situation and used the opportunity to speak out for Quinn online.

Since the GamerGate incident offended many male players, they began to push back against Sarkeesian and Quinn. However, all of these actions were labeled by Sarkeesian and Quinn as patriarchal oppression in the gaming industry. The online harassment directed at them only served to perfectly cast them as victims. Numerous media outlets interviewed them, further increasing their visibility. As a result, to the general public unfamiliar with gaming, they became seen as representatives of women in the industry. But in reality, their reputation in the gaming world had plummeted so that even many female gamers disliked them. The main reason gamers resented this incident was that they felt certain unqualified game journalists, relying solely on their writing skills and so-called special identities, could place themselves above others in the gaming industry.

Media Attention

But why were they able to thrive during the GamerGate 1.0 incident? One very important reason was that the gaming community was not united at the time. Many players didn't believe they could cause much of a stir, and most players were not even aware of the situation. Gamers back then simply assumed that they wouldn't have any substantial impact on the gaming industry. However, the truth is that the GamerGate 1.0 incident greatly reduced the future flexibility and playability of games.

In recent years, players have noticed a group dedicated to adding Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) elements to games. These individuals, using their resources and influence, have altered creative and unique game characters beyond recognition. This transformation left players feeling disappointed and frustrated, though it was difficult to address openly. The issue simmered for some time, and finally, players' anger erupted all at once with the exposure of the Sweet Baby Incorporated. Players affectionately referred to this incident as GamerGate 2.0. The origins of GamerGate 2.0 trace back to a game called Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League. The game seemed like a fairly conventional game, but its storyline left many players feeling uncomfortable. At that point, a Brazilian player named Kabrutus took a stand. Back in 2022, after completing God of War: Ragnarok, he felt that parts of the story were forced and inconsistent. He began investigating and eventually came across Sweet Baby Inc. Kabrutus discovered that, while this company had no reputation in the gaming community, it somehow had the ability to directly participate in game projects and freely alter storylines according to its own preferences.

Kabrutus

From then on, Kabrutus started tracking every move this company made. In early 2024, he found out that Sweet Baby Inc. had been involved in the storyline development of Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League. So, he created a discussion group on Steam, a gaming platform, called “Sweet Baby Inc. Detected.” The goal of this group was simply to identify which games Sweet Baby Inc. had been involved in and mark them accordingly. Unexpectedly, his actions provoked dissatisfaction within Sweet Baby Inc., who saw Kabrutus’s efforts as an attempt to harass their company online. Sweet Baby Inc.‘s executive, Chris Kindred, publicly encouraged his followers on X (formerly known as Twitter) to report Kabrutus’s discussion group and attempted to get his personal account banned. However, all Kabrutus had done was indicate which games the company had worked on. The Sweet Baby Inc. retaliation attracted even more attention, and soon, the company’s questionable history was exposed.

Sweet Baby

People found that when Sweet Baby Inc. realized that online opinion was turning against them, they mobilized every available resource, inviting so-called game journalists to publish articles across major platforms, telling players that they were the real victims. When game companies were unwilling to work with them, they leveraged their influence in gaming media, paying outlets to publish articles attacking those companies that refused to cooperate.

Fortunately, these articles did not alter the direction of online opinion; instead, they made more people aware of Sweet Baby Inc.’s existence. Players even discovered that employees of this company frequently posted a large number of hateful and extreme racist remarks on X. For example, one of Sweet Baby Inc.’s founders, Kim Belair, stated during her 2019 GDC talk that the purpose of establishing the company was to make games more diverse. However, when game companies are unwilling to heed their suggestions, they resort to verbally intimidating them. “And if they don’t see the value of what you asking for, when you asking for consultant, when you ask for research, go have a coffee with your marketing team and just terrify them, with the possibility of what’s gonna happen if they don’t give you what you want.” Looks like Kim was raised in a Mafia family. These things originally happened in the dark side of the gaming industry, with few people noticing. It wasn’t until Kabrutus used the discussion group feature in Steam to document Sweet Baby Inc.’s actions that the issues came to light. Sweet Baby Inc. tried once again to use their usual tricks to intimidate Kabrutus, but this only drew wider attention.

Kim Belfair

While people were fervently condemning Sweet Baby Inc.'s actions, Sony’s PlayStation Product Director Asada's Qizilbash personally announced during the State of Play presentation that they would be bringing players a new title, Concord, set for release on August 23, 2024. However, as soon as the trailer for Concord was released, the game's reputation plummeted to rock bottom. The first issue was its gameplay, which was strikingly similar to other popular games already on the market—but this wasn’t the primary concern. Secondly, its uninspired character designs were heavily criticized, with many noting they felt like knock-offs of the Guardians of the Galaxy. What ultimately sealed the game's fate was its pricing and the mandatory use of a Playstation Network (PSN) account. To compare, Overwatch 2 and Valorant, which are both similar shooter games, are free-to-play and don’t require players to use a specific account. Sony’s decision significantly raised the barrier to entry.

Character design is often a key factor in whether players decide to try a game. One of the biggest complaints about Concord, aside from its lackluster gameplay, was its character appearances. Despite the game’s futuristic sci-fi setting, the characters showed no trace of sci-fi elements in their designs. A good character design should reflect the character's personality, profession, and backstory, but the characters in Concord wore outfits that could easily be seen in everyday life, on TV, or in magazines—often to illogical extremes. For example, one character skilled in using smoke grenades is dressed in a bright orange T-shirt and minimal white armor with no visible grenades at all, making it impractical for stealth. Every character looked like "just a person wearing clothes," and the only way players could learn about them was through in-game text. Beyond the lackluster character designs, the inclusion of pronouns for every character—even robots—left players feeling both puzzled and amused. Many saw this as a deliberate effort by the developers to push political correctness and enforce DEI principles on players. These issues collectively contributed to the game's failure to resonate with its audience. The game Concord became the straw that broke the camel's back: its failure sparked discussions that brought more players' attention to the current state of the gaming industry.

DEI was initially used to describe policies in government and corporations, aiming to create an environment where individuals and groups are treated equally regardless of race, gender, and cultural background. It is a highly important political principle. Many people understand why publishing companies promote DEI: by emphasizing that the company is DEI-friendly, they not only enhance their image among consumers and investors but, more importantly, assure employees of a safer and fairer workplace. The original intention of promoting DEI is positive, but now, due to game developers asserting themselves excessively, DEI is starting to lose its original purpose.

The players have a few complaints: Illogical storylines altered due to DEI intervention, poorly designed character models resulting from DEI involvement, a general unwillingness to be “educated” through games. Traditionally, many games have used the faces and voices of real actors when creating characters. However, in recent years, instead of directly scanning the actors’ faces as before, almost all character models based on real actors have been heavily modified—sometimes to the point where they are unrecognizable compared to the original actors. Players are not opposed to unique or unconventional character designs, nor do they expect every character to be conventionally attractive. They simply don’t want every character to be designed in a way that is overly stereotyped or outright unattractive.

People have long been aware of this issue, but due to political correctness, it has rarely been openly discussed—until the release of the Chinese game Black Myth: Wukong. In this game, many characters faithfully reflect the actors’ appearances while preserving their unique facial features. This demonstrated that character modeling can indeed retain the likeness of real-life actors.On the other hand, Unknown 9: Awakening serves as a negative example. The game’s protagonist, Haroona, was based on the real-life actor Anya Chalotra, who famously portrayed Yennefer in The Witcher live-action series. While her appearance was slightly different from the Yennefer in The Witcher games, the charm she exuded was no less compelling than the in-game character. However, in Unknown 9: Awakening, the character modeled after her was drastically altered due to DEI intervention, rendering her almost unrecognizable.

DEI can exist, but it should be something players can choose freely. Players don’t want to be educated in games. In Dragon Age:The Veilguard, players can choose how their characters talk to one and other. One character, named Tassh, identifies as non-binary. However, if the player misuses their pronouns during the game, they are penalized and forced to apologize by doing push-ups. This detail disgusted many players. By contrast, another game in the same genre, Baldur’s Gate 3, also includes DEI elements, but it allows players to freely choose their responses and players even able to avoid content with the element they dislike. It strives to respect and accommodate everyone without forcing players to conform to the developers’ perceived “correct” choices. Forcing DEI elements into games does not eliminate the barriers between people; indeed, it risks reinforcing and emphasizing stereotypes between different groups.

©Iris Chang and the CCA Arts Review