The first link:
I honestly shouldn't bother with the rest of it, as I already know it's going to be hyper-liberal conspiracy theorist bullshit.
Really? Business are good at advertising games, and that make the military better at propaganda?
Well, Two down...
The fuck does this have to do with games? That is an issue with curated storefronts by biased curators.
Ethical concern for games: Businesses pay for reviews...
This. Still has nothing to do with video games themselves. Just storefronts and general issues with unregulated capitalism.
That's it, I'm skipping the rest of the ones that are along these lines.
Yeah, and for good reason. People work those jobs with talent that could get them a hell of a lot of money in other places. Turns out people choose to work as game designers (programming wise) because they like the field, not because they want money or short hours. If you don't like it, find a new job. And of course you get fired if you attack the company that is hiring you.
This isn't an ethical concern!
Total Biscuit has done very good talks on why this is. It has more to do with there being a fair "start date" for all companies so one does not get an early review and undermine everyone else. Without a schedule you can just give out review copies to those you know are going to review positively.
Yeah, but with disclosure everyone knows where the biases are and can look to multiple places for review.
With a link to the intel article? So sorry, random gaming news site, but when you go out of your way to insult a large consumer base, the people who sell things to that consumer base is going to stop selling ads on your site. You don't publish an article calling gamers "man children who are socially inept" when your audience is exactly that. Not without losing your audience and advertisers and having to start again with a new one, at least.
So we go from absolute bullshit to anti Gamer Gate shit in what, two paragraphs?
I love how we had gotten away from the "gamers r stupid fat nerds with acne", but then right the fuck back to it with the neckbeard stereotype.
Every time I hear "women are abused when participating in games" it's liked to the "critics" like Anita or Zoe Quinn. I know they do get harassment from people, threats, etc, but that's what happens to anyone on the internet with an opinion any group does not like. Look at TB, who had quite a few issues with criticism, or the amazing atheist. When a person does things people don't like, they are attacked by people online. It's not an issue connected to gaming, gamers, or anything of the sort. It's a problem with the internet, and honestly it's not going away until we force people to use their real names online.
How about instead of pointing to these two scapegoats we actually focus on the real issues. Not "oh, games make people view women as objects" or "people hate my badly made flash game because i'm a woman!". Focus on the fact that people will stereotype women as not being gamers. Focus on how, when you play or are a girl on xbox live, you (apparently) get all the people going directly and immediately to "gamer girl" stereotypes, or using crap like "go make me a sandwich'.
There is no issue I know of that is a larger deal than that. All the bullshit about women being sexualized will go away if we actually get a large enough part of women playing "hardcore" games to offset the number of men playing them. (it won't go away, necessarily, but there will be far more money in making a neutral game rather than a sexy one). Push for more female developers, for better moderation of communities to oust fucks like described above, etc.
Build something, be constructive. All I see from these "critics" is complaining about really minor issues in games, and going so far as to directly mislead and cherry-pick information while doing so. People don't hate them because they criticism games. People have been doing that for ages. They hate them because of the false information, the misrepresentation, etc.