#GamerGate Dev Interview: My Dreams Are In The Hands Of Media That I Largely Disagree With


The Gatekeeper

Being a game designer doesn’t mean that your title will get a fair shake for exposure. A lot of titles largely go unnoticed and even more fall flat right out of the gate even after receiving a bit of promotional loving. In today’s climate, gaming journalists only want to report on games that drive clicks, and games that obviously fall within the clique’s circle of promotional amicability. One of the independent developers who isn’t part of the clique and can’t find a bit of coverage from the larger outlets is Cleril Calamity Studios.

Going by the handle of Cleril, the designer has a visual novel on Steam Greenlight called My Name Is Addiction. It’s a very risque game that covers the controversial topic matter of pornographic addiction. One might think that it’s a topic that would be as important to pundits and interlocutors from the major gaming sites as a game that deals with questing through depression… right? Wrong.

Cleril has mostly put My Name Is Addiction off to the side to focus on his upcoming turn-based RPG called Haven. He explained in a brief interview that visual novels aren’t really his forte and that it was mostly to address a topic that hasn’t been approached in a mature or thoughtful way in today’s gaming scene…

“My Name is Addiction was my first visual novel I ever created actually. Usually I designed horror, RPG, and “experience” titles. More often than not I combine all three in most of my games. I’m also not exactly the most marketable visual novel creator given I hate drawing anime-like styles and I have no interest in crafting any sort of plots involving romantic relationships (My Name is Addiction didn’t really have romantic love in it).”

It would seem like a hot-button video game topic would really turn the wheels on the conversation machine; a small cog in the greater mechanical workings of bringing diversity and different perspectives to rarely-discussed topics within gaming… yeah? But after reaching out to various outlets there weren’t many who wanted to seriously tackle any kind of dialogue about My Name is Addiction. The game only managed about 750 upvotes on Greenlight and more than 3,000 downvotes.

As to why people may not have wanted to discus the game? He states…

“The only reason I can think of for this disparity is that people don’t want me (or anyone) discussing their beloved porn.

“Even if I myself do not in any way shape or form advocate for banning pornography and don’t personally care if anyone uses it.

“I think the gaming media at large would largely despise My Name is Addiction despite it being what I consider a solid adult-themed visual novel given it has many politically incorrect statements and themes in it. Perhaps if that is too grandiose to believe then I’d figure the gaming media doesn’t want to discuss porn addiction because gamers don’t want to discuss porn addiction.”

“The other reason I don’t think the gaming media wants to touch it is due to the fact that I don’t fit the narrative. I’m not very politically correct if that wasn’t obvious with My Name is Addiction. I consider myself a game developer first and foremost though and most titles of mine have very little to do with political viewpoints.”

At present, we’re seeing a lot of gamers negatively reacting to overly politicized reviews and news about games, which forgo approaching critiques of games for the quality of their gameplay (or lack thereof), their mechanical integrity as well as the consistency in their performance. For those of you who are a bit lost on this issue, GameSpot recently featured a reviewer scoring Dead Rising 3 on PC a 3 out of 10 because he didn’t like the game’s satire, and felt it worked against his social view of certain stereotypes.

I asked Cleril if the media’s current agenda-driven nature – which has kept #GamerGate alive and well for months on end – could end up being more detrimental to indie devs in the long run or if it will help get more indies to break into the industry. Here’s what Cleril had to say….

“I hate to be a realist here but I think overall gamers will dislike independent game developers even more. My personal experience has had gamers lump me into the category of “artsy fartsy pretentious indie dev” despite me not endorsing even calling My Name is Addiction a video game (to me it’s all semantics). Plenty of games made by indies that I’ve played deserve more credit and press attention. There is one particular story I remember reading on Gamasutra about a game called “I Get This Call Everyday” which had spent a year on Greenlight before getting any attention and then it got greenlit.

“It frightens me quite frankly how it takes a year or more for games to get greenlit on Steam and the only factor determining this is whether or not the media will throw indies a bone rather than if the product is actually good or not. It also frustrates me that my dreams are more or less in the hands of what seems to be a gaming media that I largely disagree with and would most likely disagree with me.

I know a lot of people point to YouTubers as an alternative to the traditional games media platform, but I don’t know if alternative games or visual novels really work well in the context of Let’s Play sessions. Although, I can’t say that with any certainty of fact because I haven’t done a study on it, nor have I really spotted many alternative games and visual novels on the YouTube channels I frequent.

Nevertheless, there are smaller sites out there that still pay attention to independent developers, with Cleril stating…

“I was absolutely impressed by RegretZero’s review of My Name is Addiction because Matt Chellen (the reviewer) did not even go down the political route.

“I imagine most gaming sites would fault the visual novel for the political views presented. My titles overall do not fit the narrative presented and actively oppose it.”

Matt Chelen is good people. This guy also helped me out recently on some #GamerGate material and writes for the Canadian-based site, Regret Zero. You can also find him over on Twitter.

The upcoming Haven continues a narrative of leaning closer to the side of being apolitical as far as story content goes, but still delving into some mature themes. The game itself features a brooding poet dealing with some heavy personal issues and depression.

I’m curious if Cleril will be able to get Haven more coverage than My Name Is Addiction? I mean, the former catching fire in the media circles wasn’t for a lack of trying…

“I’d just like to add that I again am not here to spread my political views. I’m here to make quality video games. I’m just frustrated that I can’t do that unless the media let’s me and it’s been shown they won’t let me.“

“It seems unless developers are politically correct they will not get press coverage. Even sites like Kotaku wouldn’t cover My Name is Addiction and I even sent it to them in an attempt to get jimmies rustled.”

Kotaku passed up on a game dealing with porn? Hm, I guess they just prefer their sexy watermelon butts.

I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong with games covering, discussing or challenging the status quota with a political slant, but I think a lot of gamers find it difficult to digest those views when the media aims to push the same politicized view as the game, and even more than that, vilifying and lampooning anyone who doesn’t see things their way, sort of like the forced worldview offered up by Rock, Paper, Shotgun.

In my own opinion, I think every game deserves an opportunity to be covered based on the principle of its own merits. Those merits may vary per writer, per website. I don’t like how some websites maneuver to prohibit writers from covering a certain type of game because it doesn’t drive a certain number of hits.

Nevertheless, with a bit of perseverance, some strong word of mouth and a bit of help from a media personality (or various websites) I think some games have a good opportunity to find its own audience.

With that said, if you want to check out Haven you can do so by visiting the official Greenlight page.

(Main image courtesy of the Lehigh Valley Ramblings)



About

Billy has been rustling Jimmies for years. The GJP cried and their tears became his milkshake. Contact.

  • Friendly Joe

    Speaking as a gamer, I would have upvoted/supported this had I known about it. I am not afraid of new ideas and new kinds of games being made. I play mil-shooters. I love Minecraft. I thought Gone Home was poignant. I thought Bioshock Infinite, despite being a band shooter with mediocre mechanics, had layers of story and thematic nuance lost on many ‘serious critics’ who dismissed it. I support indie devs. Some are my friends.

    What I object to is organized effort by the games media to push a PC agenda (or any ideology) and to only support indie games made by their select clique of cool kids while trying to shame/demonize AAA games and the people who play them. There’s room for all.

    • Iam

      Worth noting the game is still on greenlight, so it’s totally still within your power to upvote and support it. I just did.

    • ClerilCalamityStudio

      That’s the problem, I can’t do much of anything to let you know about it. That’s why the media exists. I know the market exists for products like this. The trouble is that as a lone wolf I can’t shout louder than an internet cat video.

      As I said “My Dreams Are In The Hands Of Media That I Largely Disagree With.”

  • Whitney

    As a developer, I too am experiencing this from the bigger sites…

    • Whitney

      Your title really hit home, William.

      • Hmm, maybe we can discuss your game and this situation further. Hit me up at BillyDisOneAngryGamer@gmail.com, I have a few questions, if you don’t mind.

      • bigshynepo

        No longer at gamingblend?
        or is this site part of the network?

      • I’m still there, but #GamerGate stuff is too political for them.

  • Not Gonna Be Your War to Wage

    Its really sad when the success of your product lies in the hands of a small cliquish group of journalists rather than the demographic you made the product for. Its just utter bullshit. It’s like Kraft making a new flavor of cheese and because one person doesn’t like it they scrap the whole thing and never let the public decide.

    As far as how you feel about the Let’s Play streams, I hope you reconsider. While most of them focus more on big name titles that have been hyped up by the press, a lot of them are open to streaming virtually unknown titles for the pure reason of letting more people know what is out there and who has the potential to create the next big thing. These streams will try just about any game at least once. All you have to do is ask. As @KingofPol stated in one of his streams: We should do more Let’s Play with Q&A from developers.

  • GenerouslyGregarious

    Also speaking as a gamer, the actions of the many have never impacted the few. There are a lot of indie devs I’m 100% behind, a lot that I abhor and just as many that started on one side of the spectrum and moved to the other.

    I think gamers deserve more credit in their reasoning and how discerning they can be.

  • Erthwjim

    I think I’ll take a look at this game, didn’t even know it existed so thanks for the information. I also appreciate that you indicated you had a connection to the developer here, even if it is a small one: “Matt Chellen is good people. This guy also helped me out recently on some #GamerGate material and writes for the Canadian-based site, Regret Zero. You can also find him over on Twitter.”

  • LickTheEnvelope

    Up-voted. I support the devs to dev.

  • C G Saturation

    Gaming media’s primary responsibility should be to spread word of as many works of gaming media as they can, without bias towards their favorites. Yet there are so many amazing works of art that they intentionally either ignore or actively slander for political purposes. This is why current game journalism is literally no better than a clique of privileged bloggers.

    The cliques extend to developer groups as well. I’d wager that the developers defending the corrupt only got where they are through connections, instead of actual ability. They’re afraid they will get exposed as such, that’s why they’re jumping to defend their benefactors.

    We don’t need all this political favoritism corrupting game development. If I had to choose between freedom of artistic expression and selective profiteering, it’d obviously be the former.

  • Equinox

    I feel like the title of this article is misleading, because it’s taking the developer’s word at a possible reason why his games didn’t get attention from media sites and then spinning it as the most likely cause/what actually happened.

    Corruption or not, think about it like this: There are a lot of games currently being made right now. Steam Greenlight and Kickstarter are good indications of this, especially as every month or so Steam releases a post about how many games got Greenlit. Now imagine if every outlet started reporting on them – it basically moves the crowded, competing market from the services to the journals. It’s not a smart business move, because it divides writer resources that could be spent writing better, more in-depth articles about gaming into free PR spots for every man and his dog making their own [Noun] Simulator.

    Making games is a competitive process. And the sad fact is that Sturgeon’s Law applies to all aspects of it – from the shovelware titles that plague the consoles, the broken PC ports, and the indie games scene. What’s a more likely reason for this dev’s sheer number of downvotes – as well as lack of response from the journals – is that the games simply don’t appear to be good. On the one hand, you have a visual novel that, like Depression Quest, seems to tackle an issue that it’s poorly research and mostly bases from the first-person account of the dev, and on the other, what looks (and plays) like a stock RPG Maker game that prefers to use pop-culture references rather than good writing to convey its story.

    tl;dr This is all speculation from an unknown dev as to why his indie games aren’t being Greenlit on Steam or covered by the journals. It really isn’t evidence at all of corruption in games journalism or the issues surrounding #GamerGate. Unless you consider your writing about this creator and his games back in July as evidence of collusion and a potential conflict of interest.

    • I feel like the title of this article is misleading, because it’s taking
      the developer’s word at a possible reason why his games didn’t get
      attention from media sites and then spinning it as the most likely
      cause/what actually happened

      It’s using the developer’s own words to describe a headline about what the developer feels is the cause of the situation.

      What’s a more likely reason for this dev’s sheer number of downvotes –
      as well as lack of response from the journals – is that the games simply
      don’t appear to be good

      The most likely cause, and something that Cleril mentions himself. However, My Name Is Addiction — whether it’s considered good or not — was about some subject matter that’s just not discussed in the industry. I stumbled upon the game while looking through other titles on Greenlight and found the explosive comment section. There was a lot of discussion going on surrounding every aspect of the visual novel.

      You have to admit that for games media to constantly push the “conversation” angle about new and unique game experiences, they really had no interest in pushing a conversation about a game dealing with a hot-button topic like porn addiction.

      On the one hand, you have a visual novel that, like Depression Quest,
      seems to tackle an issue that it’s poorly research and mostly bases from
      the first-person account of the dev,

      Well that’s kind of the crux of the interview and what Cleril states himself: he wasn’t in the clique, his political views didn’t line up with theirs and so his game didn’t get coverage. After dabbling in Depression Quest myself, it wasn’t anything standout… but we all know why it got the coverage it did.

      tl;dr This is all speculation from an unknown dev as to why his indie
      games aren’t being Greenlit on Steam or covered by the journals. It
      really isn’t evidence at all of corruption in games journalism or the
      issues surrounding #GamerGate.

      No one really said it was supposed to be evidence of corruption. It was about a developer and how they see the current climate of game journalism — preaching about inclusion, diversity and creating conversations around different experiences, but they don’t actually practice that. The current climate is all about being in the clique.

      • ClerilCalamityStudio

        “You have to admit that for games media to constantly push the
        “conversation” angle about new and unique game experiences, they really
        had no interest in pushing a conversation about a game dealing with a
        hot-button topic like porn addiction.”

        That’s my main issue in all of this from both sides.

        Gaming media: Give us new experiences! Oh but not porn addiction! No, no, only depression and a story about lesbians!

        Gamers: Give us new experiences! Oh but don’t talk about my porn! I’m not saying all gamers. I’m only going by what most of the negative comments on the Greenlight page pertain to. Most range from “WTF is this” to “You can’t be addicted to porn!” That’s what most of the negative comments appear to be. Never mind the fact that users stooped so low as to slander me (claiming I stole the art, the music, and deleted comments).

        Depression Quest and My Name is Addiction are (to me) polar opposites both in design approach (frankly I don’t see how HTML relates to depression) and in political over/undertones. As developers we sit more or less on opposite sides of the political spectrum.

        As you say sir Billy you seem to have to be in the clique of of their political agenda to get attention on any remotely big site.

        I think Kotaku didn’t even do a piece on it because they didn’t want to drive attention away from Depression Quest (which sits in their agenda snug and cozy) given the two products are different by only some (significant) margins.

        Free speech is something of the past overall it seems.

      • Equinox

        “Gaming media: Give us new experiences! Oh but not porn addiction! No, no, only depression and a story about lesbians!

        “Gamers: Give us new experiences! Oh but don’t talk about my porn!”

        Nice strawman. It’s easy to paint the other side as unreasonable and hypocritical when you misrepresent their actions (or lack thereof) against you. Without proof to why they chose to not cover your games, all you have is speculation – and using that as evidence of wrongdoing is, honestly, disgusting.

        “I’m only going by what most of the negative comments on the Greenlight
        page pertain to. Most range from “WTF is this” to “You can’t be
        addicted to porn!” That’s what most of the negative comments appear to
        be.”

        And did you post your reasoning as to why you could be addicted to it? Did you post your research justifying that a game talking about a “major” issue wasn’t just a personal issue for you being presented as something more widespread? You mentioned a previous post at having researched the topic – I’d like to see what research you based your game on.

        “Never mind the fact that users stooped so low as to slander me
        (claiming I stole the art, the music, and deleted comments).”

        So because they slandered you, it’s okay to strawman their arguments to paint them as unreasonable? That seems intellectually dishonest.

        Plus, I remember seeing this game months ago. From what I remember, your original project image was this [https://1.bp.blogspot.com/–fs_Z7w0LKQ/UAfKlV_ePOI/AAAAAAAABKc/Qln4nnQWLn0/s640/woman-licking-lips-thumb11161836.jpg], but painted over using an artistic picture. That pretty much amount to copyright infringement, which IS theft. Then there’s also this comment from your game’s page [https://i.imgur.com/VLb3tqz.png]. So you didn’t delete comments, you resubmitted the project…which had the side effect of deleting the comments on the previous submission. So it’s not slander.

        “I think Kotaku didn’t even do a piece on it because they didn’t want to
        drive attention away from Depression Quest (which sits in their agenda
        snug and cozy) given the two products are different by only some
        (significant) margins.”

        Which is, again, speculation. Meaning that there could have been other reasons for them not wanting to cover your game.

        “Free speech is something of the past overall it seems.”

        Except your right to free speech wasn’t violated. Your game wasn’t censored. It wasn’t deleted without your consent. Your free speech was NOT violated.

        Just like it’s within the realm of free speech for people to voice criticisms on your game, or for publications to not cover them. They have no obligation to cover you – and quite frankly, whining about how you weren’t covered because it “didn’t fit their agenda” seems like you’re just trying to erect strawman arguments in an attempt to slander them and make yourself out to be a victim of a shadowy cabal.

        If you have proof that you were the victim of some shadowy cabal, present it. Until then, I’m going to call it like I see it: you’re just whining because people aren’t willing to bend over to your own sense of entitlement.

      • Equinox

        And before you comment on me misrepresenting the image issue:

        Here’s an article from this site that contains a post using the artsy-version of the image I posted [https://blogjob.com/oneangrygamer/2014/07/addiction-controversy-steam/] and an image from your official trailer containing it [https://i.imgur.com/H5JeEL3.png].

      • ClerilCalamityStudio

        Maybe I got a little too dramatic with my words.

        Either way, I doubt I could convince you of thinking anything different. All I’m going to address is the image.

        I did not do a paint over of the image. I didn’t draw the bottom teeth, my tongue is a different perspective, and no photoshop filter produces the affect I legitimately drew.

        I used that image and many others as references. Any artist ever in any industry does this.

      • Equinox

        “I did not do a paint over of the image. I didn’t draw the bottom
        teeth, my tongue is a different perspective, and no photoshop filter
        produces the affect I legitimately drew.

        I used that image and many others as references. Any artist ever in any industry does this.”

        Except it’s still visually similar, like you almost copied it wholesale. Even if it’s not a complete copy, it’s walking a very fine line between just using it as a reference and painting over it, considering that the composition and color scheme is pretty much exactly the same.

        “Oh and my free speech comment is about my rights. It’s about the ability to say X and not for example lose my job over it.”

        Remember that your First Amendment rights grant you the security that the government won’t pass laws to violate your freedom of speech, religion, assemble, petition, or the press. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from criticism, nor freedom from consequences that arise from your exercising of free speech. Do people get fired for things they say outside of work? Yes, but that isn’t a violation of one’s First Amendment rights.

      • ClerilCalamityStudio

        I swear people who make the argument that it looks similar so it’s a fine line never took any art class. Any artist if they’re paying attention can “copy” shapes using their eyes just fine. I didn’t trace anything and I selectively chose to not include the teeth.

        The novel wasn’t meant to be stylized or anime-style. It was meant to contain organic shapes. That’s why it’s so similar to an image of a female licking her lips. It’s meant to look like a real female licking her lips.

        Artists who use living models don’t credit the model whom they used as reference. Artistic references are not like literary references.

        I used many photo references for drawings in the novel. Why folks like you get caught up on that one is beyond me. The novel is more or less half imagination and half imagination+reference.

        “You have the right to say everything you want but will get fired for statements that you make.”

        That means you do not have the right to say anything. If you’re punished for speaking your mind then you can’t speak your mind. I’m not seeing what’s hard to understand about this.

      • Equinox

        “I swear people who make the argument that it looks similar so it’s a fine line never took any art class.”

        I have taken art classes. You want to know why it’s a fine line? Let’s take a look at the number of principles that your image has in common with the source: the movement of the piece is the same, since the viewer’s eye is drawn along the curvature of the tongue; the harmony’s the same, since the color palette is the same in both pictures; and the balance is the same, since the elements of your image are arranged the same way as the source. The only principle you change (aside from pattern, which both images lack) is the proportion. Removing the bottom teeth isn’t enough of a change; the image still evokes the same tone and feeling as the source.

        When it comes to copyright infringement for art, it comes down to visual similarity. And those two images are, indeed, visually similar. And there’s enough legal precedence to make a claim of copyright infringement over it [Examples: https://99designs.com/designer-blog/2013/04/19/5-famous-copyright-infringement-cases/%5D.

        “Artists who use living models don’t credit the model whom they used as reference.”

        Right, because they pay the models to use the likeness of their bodies.

        “Artistic references are not like literary references.”

        Right, because you pay for the use of artistic reference for things that are not in the public domain. Companies that use stock images are able to use them because they paid for them, just like artists will pay to use the likenesses of models and actors.

        The closest place I can source that image is from a stock image from DreamsTime [https://www.dreamstime.com/royalty-free-stock-image-woman-licking-lips-image11161836]. It’s not a public domain image, either.

        “I used many photo references for drawings in the novel. Why folks like you get caught up on that one is beyond me.”

        Maybe because it was prominently featured as your game’s title image before you resubmitted your project, and it’s the second result on a Google image search for “lick lips?”

        And I’d suggest you actually check whether or not your interpretations of those photo references are significantly different to avoid claims of copyright infringement, especially if your images aren’t in the public domain.

        “That means you do not have the right to say anything. If you’re punished for speaking your mind then you can’t speak your mind.”

        Okay, since you clearly have no clue on how the First Amendment works, let me try to spell it out for you as clearly as possible.

        Your First Amendment right is about protection from the government infringing on your right to free speech/press/religion/peacefully assemble/petition. What this means is that no public official or institution – like Congress, the President, the police force, the military, or your town’s mayor – have the constitutional right to enforce an act, bill, law, or action that infringes on or otherwise denies your right to exercise your freedom to speak. Some exceptions (such as defamation, fighting word, and panic-causing speech) do exist, and are explained more in-detail here [https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/free-speech-primer-what-can-you-say].

        However, when it comes to the actions of private citizens and institutions, you have no constitutional protection from the ramifications you may face when your exercise your right to free speech…because it would be an infringement of their right to free speech, as well.

        Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence. You are free to say what you want. Just like others are free to distance themselves from you as a result.

      • Equinox

        “It’s using the developer’s own words to describe a headline about what the developer feels is the cause of the situation.”

        Right…a claim that’s unsubstantiated and then used as an example of the gaming press not covering the game because it doesn’t fit their narrative.

        “The most likely cause, and something that Cleril mentions himself.”

        Where in the article does it say that? The only other thing the dev posits as to why is because “people don’t want to discuss their beloved porn”…which is again unsubstantiated because nothing is posted to back up that claim.

        “You have to admit that for games media to constantly push the
        “conversation” angle about new and unique game experiences, they really
        had no interest in pushing a conversation about a game dealing with a
        hot-button topic like porn addiction.”

        Except I don’t have to admit anything. The game wasn’t about a “hot-topic” issue. It might be a personal issue to you or the dev, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a widespread issue.

        As for why it’s not covered: refer back to my business reason. You have a game where 80% of over 3,700 people voted ‘No’ on Greenlight, for reasons that are, quite frankly, anyone’s guess. Even if the journals weren’t corrupt, it doesn’t make sound business sense to promote this game: it’s by some unknown dev with little credibility, talking about something that’s debatably relevant in a heavy-handed manner, in a style that offers nothing novel or interesting from a gameplay sense, that a non-insignificant sample of their target audience said that they didn’t want. Just like it’s not Intel’s obligation to fund sites through advertising, it’s not the obligation of the game journals to devote column inches to any average Joe who picks up Ren’py and decided that they want to make a game and then asks the media for free PR.

        “Well that’s kind of the crux of the interview and what Cleril states
        himself: he wasn’t in the clique, his political views didn’t line up
        with theirs and so his game didn’t get coverage.”

        And the proof of that is…where, exactly? In the silence? That isn’t a compelling argument.

        “No one really said it was supposed to be evidence of corruption.”

        In an article using one dev’s thoughts about the corruption of the games media as to why his game wasn’t covered by them.

        “It was about a developer and how they see the current climate of game journalism”

        Which was also used to discuss issues of corruption, where the interview and discussion specifically about the interview took up a significant portion of the article.

      • Right…a claim that’s unsubstantiated and then used as an example of the gaming press not covering the game because it doesn’t fit their narrative.

        Because it’s his words. Doesn’t matter what your opinion of it is. It’s an interview and the developer’s words.

        he only other thing the dev posits as to why is because “people don’t want to discuss their beloved porn”…which is again unsubstantiated because nothing is posted to back up that claim.

        That’s what he believes. This is an interview, not a peer review research report. Your criticism here is completely off base.

        The game wasn’t about a “hot-topic” issue. It might be a personal issue to you or the dev, but that doesn’t mean that it’s a widespread issue.

        Pornographic addiction doesn’t have statistical veracity at the moment, but it is attached to an industry that makes it something worth discussing.

        And the proof of that is…where, exactly? In the silence? That isn’t a compelling argument.

        Why are you looking for proof from someone’s claims? It’s his opinion. People have the option to make up their minds if they see it as proof or not.

        In an article using one dev’s thoughts about the corruption of the games media as to why his game wasn’t covered by them.

        False equivalence. Nice try, though.

      • Equinox

        “Because it’s his words. Doesn’t matter what your opinion of it is. It’s an interview and the developer’s words.”

        And because it’s his words, we’re supposed to take it at face value? What credibility does he have? What is he basing that on?

        Someone’s opinion can be unfounded and uninformed. Asking why someone holds that opinion isn’t irrelevant.

        “That’s what he believes. This is an interview, not a peer review research report. Your criticism here is completely off base.”

        Is it? Beliefs, like opinions, can also be unfounded or uneducated. Taking them solely at face-value isn’t good for healthy debate.

        “Pornographic addiction doesn’t have statistical veracity at the moment, but it is attached to an industry that makes it something worth discussing”

        So, of those sources: The Time article is broken, the DailyMail has no outside links, the TechCrunch article links to a blog, the Dr. Gupta page links to its own pages, and the CNN video’s only concrete source was from eleven years ago. Doesn’t seem like a hot-button issue to me, honestly.

        “Why are you looking for proof from someone’s claims?”

        Because that’s a core underlying issue of GamerGate to begin with! Remember when Zoe Quinn made claims with little proof last December concerning her supposed harassment from Wizardchan? Or her posts – as well as those of Anita Sarkeesian – over the past few months? Weren’t people asking for proof of those claims?

        It’s not a one-way street. Someone making a claim about the other side doesn’t get a pass because you agree with them. And this is especially true when they lack proof to back up those claims.

        “False equivalence. Nice try, though.”

        If you didn’t want to compare the two issues together, then why put them in the same article? Why open the headline with #GamerGate,and not Independent? Why not just focus on the interview itself?

        It seems like you wanted to use the interview to color the overall tone of the piece, without using it to make an outright statement. Or, as I said in my original post, to put a spin to the article.

      • ClerilCalamityStudio

        Until someone decides to find out why 3K+ people downvoted the title and 99% of gaming sites wouldn’t cover it then yes we only have my word to go by.

        Do you have to agree with it? No.

        Do you have evidence to prove my opinion otherwise? No.

        It’s conjecture on both sites. The difference is that I have my experience to justify my opinion and you are simply citing a lack of evidence which I agree with you on.

        Feel free to find the evidence you seek. Otherwise I will continue to hold my position that the reason most folks downvoted it was due to the subject matter primarily.

        I couple this with my experience so far with Haven on Greenlight. Given it’s an alpha it still has a better yes:no ratio and 1/3 of the followers that My Name is Addiction has. My Name is Addiction has been up on Greenlight for 2 months.

        Haven has been up for 7 days. Besides the genre difference Haven has nothing to do with porn.

      • Equinox

        “Until someone decides to find out why 3K+ people downvoted the title and
        99% of gaming sites wouldn’t cover it then yes we only have my word to
        go by.

        Do you have evidence to prove my opinion otherwise? No.”

        And going by speculation without evidence breeds animosity over actions that might not have happened to begin with. Since you’re the one making the claim, the burden of proof is on you as far as its veracity is concerned.

        Right now you’re playing a dangerous game. You’re stooping down to the level of those against #GamerGate – by using a broad brush to paint a large subset of gamers with nothing more than your own speculation. A person could have downvoted your game for any number of reasons, not just because of the subject matter. Maybe they don’t like visual novels. Maybe they didn’t like the art. Maybe they thought the writing was juvenile or immature. But saying that a majority of 3,000 people – many of whom you had no contact with – voted ‘No’ because of the subject matter because “gamers don’t want to talk about their porn” in intellectually dishonest.

        As I said, I’m not going to do your research for you. You’re free to use your speculation based on your experiences with a narrow subset of people who voted on your games, but it doesn’t exempt you for using logical fallacies to explain why it failed nor criticisms that your reasoning is flawed.

      • ClerilCalamityStudio

        I explicitly said not all gamers. Do not compare me to those who oppose #gamergate.

        It doesn’t exempt you from by and large skewing what I’m saying to fit the narrative you want to create about how I’m this evil game dev that hates gamers. I’m in an interview about how I agree with #GamerGate. It’s a disservice to your intelligence to put me on the opposite side of the fence.

        I’m a game developer, not a politician. I’m not here to talk about semantics with you.

      • Equinox

        “I explicitly said not all gamers. Do not compare me to those who oppose #gamergate.”

        From the interview:
        >The only reason I can think of for this disparity is that people don’t want me (or anyone) discussing their beloved porn.
        >…I’d figure the gaming media doesn’t want to discuss porn addiction because gamers don’t want to discuss porn addiction.

        From a previous comment you made:
        > I’m not saying all gamers. I’m only going by what most of the negative comments on the Greenlight page pertain to.

        When called out on it, you move the goalposts. When I ask for the evidence you base your conjecture on, you give a non-informative response about your experiences. Look, I read through the comments on the Greenlight page; at most one, maybe two comments hinted that they downvoted because of the subject matter. More comments that that said they downvoted simply because they weren’t interested, that the art was bad, that the game suffered from a poor presentation, or the ever-so-eloquent “it’s crap.” All told, I have about 27 unique posters from the comments voting no…and you want to tell me that you’re basing your conjecture that “gamers don’t want to discuss their beloved porn” on a tenth of a percent of voters?

        That honestly seems exactly like the anti-GamerGate rhetoric of using the actions of a few to claim the reasoning of a majority of your downvoters, even though the evidence is NOT there to support your claims. If you don’t want to be compared to them, then maybe try not using the same debate tactics.

        “It doesn’t exempt you from by and large skewing what I’m saying to fit the narrative you want to create about how I’m this evil game dev that hates gamers.”

        Point out exactly where I did this. I’m saying you are making unsubstantiated claims on the reasonings and actions of a group of people who said “No” to you on Greenlight, and how that is disingenuous. I have not called you evil, nor have I claimed that you hate gamers.

        “It’s a disservice to your intelligence to put me on the opposite side of the fence.”

        It’s a disservice to my intelligence that you choose to misrepresent my arguments and claim things that haven’t happened. I never said you were against GamerGate. I’m saying you’re using the same kind of rhetoric they used to make yourself out to be this victim of some cliquish group of journalists and gamers who are against any mention of jerking it to porn.

        If you have the evidence to back up your claims and opinions, then I’d love to see it.

      • And because it’s his words, we’re supposed to take it at face value?

        You can choose not to.

        Beliefs, like opinions, can also be unfounded or uneducated. Taking them solely at face-value isn’t good for healthy debate.

        Well, it’s completely possible for people to do an article breaking down the comments. No one is stopping anyone from being critical outside of this particular medium or within the confines of this comment section.

        So, of those sources: The Time article is broken, the DailyMail has no outside links, the TechCrunch article links to a blog, the Dr. Gupta page links to its own pages, and the CNN video’s only concrete source was from eleven years ago. Doesn’t seem like a hot-button issue to me, honestly.

        Until there’s an actual conversation about it, I guess we’ll never know, will we?

        Remember when Zoe Quinn made claims with little proof last December concerning her supposed harassment from Wizardchan? Or her posts – as well as those of Anita Sarkeesian – over the past few months? Weren’t people asking for proof of those claims?

        That’s fine. But this was just an interview. Anyone is welcome to further add a critical lens to the comments. It should be welcomed.

        Why open the headline with #GamerGate,and not Independent? Why not just focus on the interview itself?

        #GamerGate is many things. Part of the focus is on the way coverage is handled based on a slant propagated by a clique mentality. The interview focused on clique aspect of the game journalism circuit.

      • Equinox

        “Until there’s an actual conversation about it, I guess we’ll never know, will we?”

        Your right, we won’t. But using stale data and non-scholarly sources won’t get that conversation going.

    • ClerilCalamityStudio

      I’ve researched pornography addiction for years. The novel itself is 90% fictional honestly.

      As for the RPG Maker title. I tried using another engine (it wouldn’t of worked for what I needed) and Haven is still an alpha. It’s literally been about 2 months of development. I can assure you as of right now that what you’re seeing of Haven is going to change in the future. I’m trying a different approach to Greenlight. My Name is Addiction was put on Greenlight when it was finished (more or less, there is some writing I wanted to adjust). You don’t start advertising a product without building up any hype.

      Haven being on Greenlight is an attempt to build a following for it. For the record, Haven has a much better yes:no vote ratio than My Name is Addiction so I definitely think the subject matter of My Name is Addiction is a significant portion of the “No” votes. And Haven is just an alpha while My Name is Addiction was finished when it was put up on Greenlight. That tells me something.

  • Jake_Was_Here

    Ironic that this guy should reference I Get This Call Every Day. The game DID get greenlighted, but the dev pulled it from Steam because they’re virulently opposed to #GamerGate and have come to the conclusion that Steam helps enable the destructive “gamer” culture that birthed it.

    • ClerilCalamityStudio

      Really? Do you have a source for that I can look at?

      I knew the dev pulled it off of Greenlight but from what I read (and understand) he took it down as a sign of protest against Valve denying Paranautical Activity due to having found a publisher (ergo bypassing Greenlight).

Skip to toolbar