[quote=Hellis]Instead you strawman and put words that i didn't say and tried to derive a different meaning then what I stated.

...

YOu on the other hand, is being sympathetic towards criminal activity.[/quote]

Uh-huh, I'm the one Strawmanning here. Got it.

[quote=Hellis]There was a actual, real and bomb threat, against a public building, over the fact that a woman doesn't agree with us and percieve a problem and might have exploited sympathy to sell her shit.[/quote]

Me and Dipper have all referenced shit that's already been shared in this thread... Your building claim though? No where... Sorry, show the source or I'm not counting that as an argument.
Plus, how did you tell it as an 'actual' threat? Did they show up in the area, did they give away tons of personal info? Spam a personal phoneline? etc.

And no, don't give me that "All threats must be crushed the same" crap. You made the distinction this one was 'real', so show me why that distinction is valid.

[quote=Hellis]The moment, the very moment threats of pshysical violence comes up we have to take a stand against it if we are to be anywhere close to credible.[/quote]

First, Dipper already pointed out how we do... So unless if you mean arresting every person who makes an online threat... You're crying for results you're already getting.

[quote=Hellis]And good job by the way, not at all adressing the fact the point that gamers drive gamedevs on the run aswell. See, the way people dogged bioware writing staff. It's a case of sheer entitlement.[/quote]

No, that was a case of loyal fans following the series for years. Investing tons of money, time and praise into it. Only to have Bioware and EA consciously do a shit/half-assed job on the ending. 

There is a HUGE different between "You can't make a game on this topic! Sexist Bastards!" and "Bioware! Stop making poor endings to games. I don't want to buy _____ product if it's going to let me down". Which is basic business, Bioware release sub-optimal product. Customer is displeased, customer voices this and is now less likely to buy future Bioware products. Bioware now goes "Oh... This is losing customers, let's not do that again".

That's not dogging, that's not scaring Dev's away. That's basic business, people will not buy a sub-optimal product and companies will be hesitant to release sub optimal product is their customers won't buy it. 

+You really missed the fact that a lot of that anger was at EA for once again prioritizing money over game quality. 
EA is constantly known for cheating people, and destroying franchises for a quick profit. EA has done this for a long time, they've built up a bad rep for it. 
Just like calling out Anita for lying isn't sexist, calling out EA for being cheap is not dogging game companies or creating an US vs THEM mentality

[quote=Hellis]The evidence for this is shown in every single comment Dipper has made the past two pages. And most of yours as well. The only one who provides even a modicum of structured, sensible dabate here is Bravo.[/quote]

*Brovo

But oh yes, the fact we disagree with you is proof we're wrong...
No, I'm sorry but not liking us or not agree with us doesn't make us wrong. It's not proof that you're right, it simply means we disagree. 

I will give that Brovo is far more skilled at constructing arguments than most people (Me and Dipper and you included), but your bias here is that you like Brovo's delivery. Therefore he's right.
I'm sorry, but if you haven't been noticing, he's been arguing against you (and never against me and Dipper) this entire debate. 

Not liking the delivery does not make us wrong, it just means you're apparently sensitive enough that you're now resorting to "I don't like you! You're wrong!".

[quote=Hellis]I never stated gaming journalism didn't need games.[/quote]

I never said you did... o.O
Look, me saying ______ does not instantly mean I'm claiming you think the opposite.

When I say "Gaming needs more games" it strictly means that.
It does not mean "Gaming needs more games. And since this is my stance, Hellis is clearly the opposite of this".

[quote=Hellis]People know that fans make or break, not reviewers.[/quote]

Um... yea. That's business 101, fans give them the money. It's the reviewers though who help point fans to or away from the game.
Obviously reviewers call ______ game awful, but all the fans buy it anyways then it's still a success. This was never argued.

But reviewers have pull, and when they take bribes to give false ratings, that diverts a section of the fans to or away certain games for false reasoning.
And when reviewers all join up and go "Games are sexist!" it creates bad press, bad press that brings in outside media, audiences etc.

Developers and Gaming gain bad reputations, this hurts sales, and in other cases such as say basing themselves off a war it [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSm-UzWzO2E]causes media to demonize the game and scare of Publishers.[/url]

[quote=Hellis]And the reviewers that matter in most devs eyes are not the giants like IGN. It is people like Yahtzee, total buiscit.[/quote]

In terms of sale numbers, but these are never the critics going around falsely attacking games or gamers for sexism.

So yes we can agree on the fact that people such as Total Biscuit influence more gamers decision to buy a game than say a site like Kotaku.
But Kotaku are the kinds of people twisting so many people to attack video games, to see video games as sexist, to think that gamers are all looking to give death threats.

So no, you don't get to ignore their effect because Total Biscuit and Yahtzee are successful channels.

[quote=Hellis]I am curius, where are your sources. Who do you got on the inside? What gives you the gall to try and tell others to take a closer look on the industry. This time you barked up the wrong tree. Swallow your pride and admit when you are in the wrong, for once in your life.[/quote]

You do realize sources have been shared this entire thread right up until you barged in claiming us to be wrong.
Then it was really just you making unsourced arguments as to why we're wrong, and us using basic reasoning to show what that's flawed thinking.

And no, just because you claim to have talked to people in some companies before doesn't make you an expert.
You know what makes you an expert? Actually being one of those developers.

So no, you having friends doesn't suddenly add truth to your accusations.
But even as a developer, you need to rationally defend your point.
And strawmanning us, moving the goal post and simply saying "I'm wrong" doesn't make us wrong.

And I've admitted to being wrong plenty of times...
I'd be a Pro-Life, Anti-LGBT, Anti-Vaccine, Feminist Christian if I didn't.
But when I admit to being wrong is when I've been faced with logical arguments, not those aggressively made in an attempt to vilify people.
And a number of those changes I made were actually done in OT so your "For once if your life" comment either shows

a) A completely lack of knowledge of me and my activities in OT. In which case, stop talking like you know me.
b) Purposely ignoring info for being condescending.

[quote=Hellis]Reviews are also a matter of personal taste, and what the reviewer hold the highest. So yes, conceptually good games that fall short are given higher scores then might seem warrented to you or me. But we do not have any right to hold them to that. To do so is do display a crazy level of selfentitlement, it really is. "YOu only gave it a high score becouse of LGBT content." for example. Can we prove that? No. Can we choose not to ever click on that persons reviews ever again; Yes. Yet some of the reviewers get hate male. For what, liking something you do not? That is fucking bizarre and sad.[/quote]

Um, once again completely missing the point (or purposely dodging it).
The criticism is about bribery may it be through money, sex, favors etc.

I also have never seen a case where a game got boosted reviews because of LGBT content. We're not arguing that we don't like a reviewer disagreeing with us, please stop saying this, and stop strawmanning. It's clear proof of corruption, bias etc. that we have issues with.

So if you can please stop taking legit worries, and twisting it into entitlement that would be great.

[quote=Hellis]Also, please, please stop using the word feminazi.I mean, It makes you look like a total goof. Its a overused slander. Nothing anita has done deserve it. Is she possibly a con? Yes. Is she a personal shill? Yes. Is she a felame superiority who screams that all men are pigs and need to die? No. That is not where her flaws lie, as many as they are,.[/quote]

Oh sorry, would you rather I go back to saying "I'm sick of feminism/feminsit's?"

Except... you bitched at me earlier where I had to clarify I meant a specific kind of feminists, since the feminazi terms.
Hellis make up your mind, you either want me to simply say "I don't like feminism" or you want me to use a term that more accurately describes the kinds of people I have issue with.
You don't get to bitch about both.