To preserve a hobby for the ones that enjoy it, a modicum of conservatism is required to keep it intact from the SJ-CUCK-oos.

Looking at the current situation within nerd culture it’s clear that there are major problems of fighting between those that are very politically slanted, versus those that just want to enjoy the content of their interest. No matter where you go, within which genre or IP or whatever you like, there will be an undeniable tension among those proclaiming to be there for the enjoyment and the ones there for social justice. Because it seems to only be a matter of time before someone says or does something that attracts the wrath and ire of one or both sides, for something that isn’t even necessarily a thing to begin with. More often than not, a fire will start because of a bad take based on political perception, this also more often than not from the people that aren’t really interested in the hobby as much as using it as a soap box to tout out their virtue and ideological purity, or maybe more realistically, spreading their toxic corruption that will inevitably kill any sort of enjoyment that the hobby has provided previously. One can easily find examples of this within gaming and comics, as the major publishers have sided with those that wish to destroy the hobby from the inside, though they don’t see it as that. For them it’s just a transformation into a more “open and inclusive space for everyone* to be part of”. The problem with this however is that the ‘everyone’ they refer to, are those that share their ideological views, i.e. virtuous persons that toe the politically correct line of identity politics and intersectional piety. 

If it sounds ridiculously religious, it’s because that’s just what it is. For example, the latest and now seemingly forgotten battlefield was “The last of us part 2”, a game that was so highly anticipated that when it was first announced there was a great blip on the nerdgasm radar. Finally the story of two of gaming’s most beloved characters, Joel and Ellie, was going to continue. But as the date for release approached, there was a subtle but significant change in tone. There had already been some red flags, as the portrayal of Ellie being gay did stir some unsettling waves, for with these times, such a thing is a sure way to spot progressive writing. But what made things come to a head was how there was a heavy air around the project, that turned into a pure cloud of military grade mustard gas when leaks of the games plot came out two months before the planned release, and it would make a rumble through the whole gaming world. The response from developing studio, Naughty Dog, was to false DMCA videos on YouTube and crack down with legal threats against anyone that dared to speak of the leaks. This was interpreted as an all out attack on gamers and the response from gamers was savage. Among other things the creator of The Last of us and VP of Naughty Dog, Niel Druckmann, got the not so nice nickname “Cuckmann”. 

But as leaks were somewhat dubious in nature, theories flourished making the response of Naughty Dog look like how governments smack at conspiracy theorists (did you know that Alex Jones has been technically correct in several of his claims?) which in turn made people even more frantic in their theories and conclusions to what a mess TLOU2 was going to be. As the game finally released, the shit show was a go. Progressive narrative, bad writing, cardboard characters, faux moral slapping, train wreck plot. Holy shit this game was a true mess. But the real kicker was the praise it got from the critics, being hailed as a 10/10 perfect game with the creme de la creme of story and writing. Feelings ran hot the following weeks as more and more people played it themselves, with many concluding that at best it was a somewhat decent game, not great but not terrible, and at worst it made E.T. for the Atari 2600 look like a masterpiece. 

So how come the sequel to one of gaming’s arguably most beloved games was such a dumpster fire? For starters, Neil Druckmann is a professed progressive that praises the works of Anita Sarkeesian. Second, the studio itself is just as progressive as Druckmann. I mean, what could go wrong? However, the real problem with the game was the obvious political slanting in character portrayal and the inclusion of contemporary ideology in a setting which logically wouldn’t really leave room for it. Even worse was the betrayal from the creators against the players since in a measure to hide the twists in the story, trailers had shown Joel being a large part of the game, which wasn’t really the case as he eats a golf club sandwich given by butch lady character Abby early in the game. 

I’m not going to be whipping much more at the game since it’s not the main point of this insane rambling. What I wanted to get to by way of TLOU2 was how since it contains and presents the ‘right’ ideological idols, the media critics showered it with praise, even if reality was quite different. But also, anyone that did not agree with this sentiment was labeled as haters, incels and whatnot. This of course led to retaliations, as anyone who genuinely enjoyed the game became targets for vitriol from the opposite side, though many also cried wolf when none was there. 

The thing I want to point out here is that all this political cock fighting has only led to those who are in it for the enjoyment of the hobby, in this case gaming, becoming unwilling and/or unwitting targets. It even came to the point that voice actresses for Abby, Laura Bailey, received hate and threats for her work. This is outrageous as she was doing her job as a professional voice actor. I might not like the character Abby, but I certainly do not bear any ill will towards the voice actor. To do so is just stupid. But sadly this is the climate that has been created as the political and ideological battle attacks people, taking focus away from the work of fiction that is supposed to be the object of criticism. Hence I wonder if all this could have been avoided if there had been more gatekeeping done for gaming as a hobby?

There’s certainly no guarantee that progressives wouldn’t have poisoned the hobby anyway, but could such major corruption as we see today have been lessened? Continuing with the topic of gaming I want to bring you back to 2014, when leaks about the extreme nepotism within the indie sphere was uncovered, with fine stuff like awarding prices from IGF (Independent Games Festival) to friends and fellow jury members rather than to developers that actually deserve it. But even worse, there was this little thing about the person Maya “Legobutts” Kramer, a PR-agent that at the time was representing a bunch of indie devs, most notably ZQ, and also did PR for Silverstring Media, which in turn was backed by big A. I recommend watching Indie fensible! The Maya ‘Legobutts’ Kramer Story! v2 for more meat on this topic, as it really does explain how bad the situation was at the time and how deep the roots of corruption goes.

All this came out with the whole Zoepost that people attribute to be the beginning of GamerGate, however I am of the firm belief that the Zoepost was to GG what the assassination of Franz Ferdinand was to the great war. The real thing that kicked of GG was the “Gamers are dead” articles that the crap game journos shat out, but the thing that led up to this was the uncovering of the almost incestious relationships that was going on within the indie scene, with Legobutts as something of a spider in the web. This was the true cause for what became Gamergate, not the lusty adventures of ZQ. Because as things progressed we also found out that gaming journalists had their own cabal that decided what to and what not to write, a.k.a. GameJournoPros which had existed since 2010. But also, before all this we had the Kane and Lynch review scandal where writer Jeff Gerstmann was booted from GameSpot for giving a less than expected review on the game Kane & Lynch: Dead Men. Because GameSpot at the time had become one big poster for the game as Eidos Interactive had paid for a very heavy campaign on the website, so as to the point that they expected glowing reviews for their financial engagement. It wasn’t until 2012 that this was confirmed to be true. 

The foundation for the current era of gaming was truly laid back then, and as people started to wake up to the blatant corruption within gaming journalistics and indie scene, they started demanding transparency which of course was met with a doubling down from the opposing side, since they (the journos and prominents of the indie sphere, often one and the same) stood to lose a lot in both reputation and finance. So is it any wonder that everything was turned up to 11? The main effect of it all was that it showed how the SJW plague nestled itself into hobbies, like a cuckoo put in a nest, because we have seen that these people aren’t able to create something new on their own and need to cannibalize an already established hobby/genre/IP to survive. Real effin parasites. 

But it leads us back to the original question. Because to be blunt, in a sense I do think there is a need for gatekeeping. To preserve a hobby for the ones that enjoy it, a modicum of conservatism is required to keep it intact from the SJ-CUCK-oos. Taking a look at where or how they got in in the first place, I’d argue that it was mainly the indie scene that provided the main entrance in tandem with the game journalists. 

Now I can say that I’ve enjoyed a lot that has come from that scene because it is a place of real creativity. Especially in these days where AAA developers and publishers are more interested in throwing up the next overly generic FPS that they can slap a sticker with Call of Duty <next puke title> or Battlefield <graverobbers> onto and rake in cash from stupid kids and other poor souls via gambling boxes- oh no, I mean surprise mechanics of course… Predators, that’s what they are. But the indie scene was also the one most vulnerable to political infiltration as many that partake in the scene where well meaning oddballs that sadly were easy to manipulate. Add to that a massive growth in just a short span that made it a burgeoning gold mine as it’s popularity spiraled and due to it being just a small part, an island if you will, of the greater gaming scene, those that took control became the supreme rulers, which I’ve already talked about with the IGF mess. 

So would gatekeeping really have had any effect? Maybe, maybe not but I want to think that it could have made people more vigilant about who to listen to. Because, again, coming through the pipes of the indie scene we have the game journos that had way too much influence over gaming as a whole. They can be blamed for the infection since transparency wasn’t a thing and to a great degree still isn’t, even if people are more critical these days and rely more on independent content creators than established media outlets. 

Sadly, the damage is already done. We are living in a culture war and the battle for our minds is ongoing at this moment. That’s why I’m asking for gatekeeping, not to block anyone from coming in, rather just to have a checkpoint for the intent of those that want to engage. It goes without saying that (for the most part) the more is merrier, but only when those more are on the same wavelength, in this case having a genuine interest in the hobby and not an intent to use it to spread ideological garbage. Though there is some light at the end of the tunnel as to gaming, other hobbies are still in the dark. Like for instance the Tabletop Roleplaying Game hobby, where Wizards of the Coast has buckled under the progressive writers ugly mugs. But not only there, all over the ttrpg world there is a sledgehammer move to shove progressiveness in the face of would be players, filled with language policing, narrowed character portrayals and rules as to conduct a game.Though so far been the most egregious example of this toxic progressive sort came when people seriously compared fantasy races to real people, saying that how orcs have been portrayed is a caricature of black people. I’ve never heard anything as racist as that, just to think of there being a likeness at all is just so dumb. But it doesn’t stop there, you can’t even play a racist character ‘in game’ because that means that you are a racist away from the table as well. No, to these people ttrpg is supposed to be a “safe space” for delicate little snowflakes that just want the world to cater to their obsessive compulsions and radical reality absent fantasies. 

My stance is that people can run their games in any way they seem fit for themselves and their groups. But I draw a pretty hefty line when these people want to start dicating over how I should run my games or how my players or I should make characters. 

Look, pumpkin face, IF I or any of my players want to play a respectable dwarf with a burning hatred of elves, goblins, and the french, it’s their goddamn right to do so. Even if a player wanted to have a character whose main goal is to have a final solution against confused unicorns, that is A-OK because it’s NOT REAL. The fact that the people that espouse equality and inclusivity for all, act worse than anything they claim to fight against, just shows that they don’t care about their “cause”. They are just nasty egocentric rats that will do anything to gnaw their way to the top of the pile of perceived virtue, to appear to be the purest and most enlightened of moralists. But in the end they are just husks of lies and putrid resentment that can’t handle a difference of opinion, or reality for that matter. These are the people whom gatekeeping is to hinder and never allow in, because we see what the ones that have wormed their way in have done to the hobby as a whole. Whether it be PC or console gaming, card games, Tabletop Roleplaying games, board games, or miniatures; these people are doing their damndest to ruin them to make themselves look better.

Therefore I say we need gatekeeping. We need to reclaim our hobbies and make them into fun and leisure again, not mouthpieces for identity politics.