She is Zoe Quinn's competitor for who is the most oppressed and harassed by gamers (I'm not making this up, they literally bicker on twitter with passive-aggressive comments about who is more harassed whenever the other gets more press coverage).
More specifically, she is that crazy-eyed game developer of Revolution 60 who doesn't seem to own a hair brush, looks like a deer in headlights, accuses any interviewer who poses real questions to her of being hateful, and is constantly antagonizing people online and doxxing them and harassing them while claiming that they are harassing her and threatening her. The person who is interviewed by countless news outlets because her life is in such constant danger from gamers that she can't go back to the safety of her own home (even though those interviews have been proven to always be conducted from the safety of her own home).
She's the SJW-type who claimed she is just like Batman and tastelessly uses the slur "aspies" to insult people with autism, directly.
She's also the person who has capitalized off of stirring up the common belief that female game developers are constantly under direct and imminent threat to life and body by putting up a Patreon that basically says "give me money for being harassed" (ostensibly it's for more than that, but she doesn't promise to make games or do anything more than hire someone to help her with twitter for the $160,000+ USD per year that she earns on Patreon).
She is basically the equivalent of an ambulance chaser. And she apparently doesn't understand how Greenlight works (if you aren't interested in personally buying a game, you're supposed to click the "no" button in response to the "would you buy this game?" question).
If you were to ask most people who she is, they'd probably say "she's that indie game dev who keeps trying to make all this gaming controversy of the last six months about her". If you were to ask her who she is, she would tell you that she is the center of the controversy and also that she is the most famous woman in technology (note: she actually stated this).
Here is a notable article she wrote back in July on Polygon about the daily harassment of women in tech: https://archive.today/3jMDP
Here's a popular video of her on Huffington Post on a panel with Erik Kain of Forbes and Hotwheels (apparently he's the guy who started 8chan): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNKvF5jOXUk
For what it's worth, I used to follow her and initially did sympathize with her efforts toward diversity in gaming, before the events of the last six months. It wasn't even these events which initially turned me against her, though. It was witnessing how she treated other people. Vicious, mean, duplicitous. I've watched her instigate pitchfork mobs around anyone who so much as politely questions her on things or shared differing opinions. She is a self-proclaimed victim who is constantly acting like a bully - even toward people in her own circle. That she's then gone on to (gleefully and admittedly) doxx people and threaten their jobs for disagreeing with her while herself whinging to the press at every turn that she's the one being doxxed and threatened just made it all the easier to be satisfied with my personal choice to disregard her entirely.
However, she's maintained her status as industry darling (as evidenced by the massive support of her vague Patreon with no promised deliverables that pulls in a bigger income than a senior developer in most of the software industry), which makes anyone daring to speak up against her in any way even remotely critical from any are from within the industry somewhat notable.
By the way, here's a post on facebook from her husband from about the moment the game went up on Greenlight, claiming that they were the victim of evil haters "voting against the game" and that it is up to everyone to defend the tenets of social justice and stand against evil by voting for the game (you can't make this stuff up): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B9LNAq0CAAAN0vG.jpg
For the record, I voted "against" the game, too. Not because of any sort of agenda, but because Steam Greenlight specifically asks you to say "YES" or "NO" in response to the question "Would you buy this game if it were on Steam?". Since it looks like an uninspired terrible PS1 game with awful gameplay that is literally an iOS port and there is not a single chance that I would ever buy it, I voted "no". I also voted against that Hatred game that everyone lost their shit about a few weeks ago. Not because I have any problem with it existing, being sold on steam, or being played -- but because I personally didn't see anything about it that would compel me to ever play it, much less buy it.
In the end, though, she has become a controversial character, so she and her husband are probably correct that there are going to be some number of people who were eagerly awaiting its appearance on Steam just so they could vote against it, the same way there were countless game journalists and indie industry friends of hers eagerly awaiting its release so they could vote for it.
In the end, it was greenlit and it'll be put up on the store and some people will rush to by it just to show their support, others will buy it without having a clue what it is or who she is, and tons will choose not to buy it (mostly because it doesn't interest them). I've seen so much awful, broken, uninspired, and even outright fraudulent shit make its way onto Steam (directly; without even having to go through Greenlight!) that as much as I dislike Brianna Wu, there's no particular reason her game shouldn't make it onto the store.
Ultimately, that is how a free market works, anyway. It's not about playing the victim or attacking people or anything else. It's about whether you made something that has enough appeal and value to enough people that they will give you money for it (though I guess most people making a game of this level wouldn't have it reviewed and promoted by a bunch of people in the gaming industry like hers is sure to be, simply because of who she is - but whatever). Ultimately, those people will leave reviews about the game on Steam and on other places, like (http://www.metacritic.com/game/ios/revolution-60)[MetaCritic]. In a free market, the number of people who make their choices and comments based on the actual product as otherwise disinterested players and customers will far outnumber the people who mindlessly vote for or against her game based on their affiliation or dislike of her and it will all even out to where it "should" be, organically.
Besides, if that jackass who made WarZ and treated his customers like shit can be on Steam, then I can't think of many people detestable enough to not allow on Steam.
