How can "gamers" and "social justice warriors" get along?
- Thread starter Burnouts3s3
- Start date
Recommended Videos
How can SJW's get along with Gamers? The same way witch hunters get along with the young accused women. They need to stop believing in "witches" and call off the hunt. They are the ones on they offensive, only they can stop the conflict.
Eh? How did Metro 2033 treat women terribly? I've heard the arguments for Last Light being sexist, ranging from well-founded - "The only female character with any agency buggers off for most of the game, only reappearing for a stilted and awkward love-scene." - to less well-founded - "This game has strippers in it and that's sexist!" - but never anything about the first game.Vault101 said:
What I dislike about SJW is well...you know that feeling you get when you were younger and you we're about to clean up your room, without being told, and then your mom then tells you how much of a slob you were for not cleaning up your room, and then you feel this urge just not to do it anymore?
It's starting to make me question games and tvshows when several months ago I would have no problem with. I like Korra, Ms. Marvel, and my Hawke in Dragon Age was female since I felt that matched best.Now I'm thinking did they make that character a woman because that is what they wanted to make? Or did they want me to fill some quota? Did they make this main character black because that's the vision they had, or did they want to avoid "backlash"? ( And I'm speaking as a black male)
Another thing that irked me was how people were turning Frozen into an allegory for gay acceptance, feminism, etc. I don't really like having the stuff I like being used as the spearhead for agendas or movements ( even if I agree with what they stand for). Makes me feel...used? It would be like someone used Frieza's transformation as an allegory for transgendered acceptance It's just...no, don't take stuff I like to spearhead your agenda, even if I support equality between the races and sexes.
I do and encourage diversity in mediums...but when it feels like people are just changing things just so people don't get offended and face backlash, like they HAVE TO do it, or else they are racist, sexist, misogynistic ableist, etc. it bothers me.
So like all things, hopefully this offended culture fades off into obscurity within the year.
It's starting to make me question games and tvshows when several months ago I would have no problem with. I like Korra, Ms. Marvel, and my Hawke in Dragon Age was female since I felt that matched best.Now I'm thinking did they make that character a woman because that is what they wanted to make? Or did they want me to fill some quota? Did they make this main character black because that's the vision they had, or did they want to avoid "backlash"? ( And I'm speaking as a black male)
Another thing that irked me was how people were turning Frozen into an allegory for gay acceptance, feminism, etc. I don't really like having the stuff I like being used as the spearhead for agendas or movements ( even if I agree with what they stand for). Makes me feel...used? It would be like someone used Frieza's transformation as an allegory for transgendered acceptance It's just...no, don't take stuff I like to spearhead your agenda, even if I support equality between the races and sexes.
I do and encourage diversity in mediums...but when it feels like people are just changing things just so people don't get offended and face backlash, like they HAVE TO do it, or else they are racist, sexist, misogynistic ableist, etc. it bothers me.
So like all things, hopefully this offended culture fades off into obscurity within the year.
thats because I meant Metro last light....my badDragonlayer said:
the stripper thing...depends on hwo you handle them
also theres this conversation amongst some female performers that reeks so much of "THINGS WOMEN TALK ABOUT" its actually almost hilarious
it is possible to like something while being aware of its faults...although this concept flys over so many people headsThe_Kodu said:
You know or we can keep on as present with people yelling "you play this game you must be a RAPIST".[/quote]
excpet most pople aren't saying that and this continues misinterpretation is a real effing problem
I personally deal with members of both groups near daily. I believe myself to be sympathetic to both sides. Personally, I think the knee-jerk reaction we gamers have developed in the face of criticism has became detrimental to us. There was a point early on that we needed it. When called sociopathic murderers during media crusades up until recently, the technique worked well; we refused to give the opposition any ground to stand on because there was none. For the most part though, we are more accepted as a medium. Everyone games in some form nowadays. However now anytime ANY criticism occurs we have a knee-jerk reaction. That should not be the answer for everything.
We do have issues in our medium. Race, gender, etc are some of them and SJW (seriously easier to type) are right in that regard. We NEED a wider representation of heroes and villains. Not every hero should be a burly white dude. Part of Video Games' appeal is Escapism. I can be something I'm not. If I want to play as another race, I'll play as another race. If I want to play my character as a woman, I should be aloud too. Character options should always be available. (Personally I loved the fact you can do most types of people in RPGs, especially Bioware games.)
However, as with every argument there is two sides, especially more extreme sides. I'm not saying replace EVERY Burly white dude with an Asexual Trans Eskimo Paraplegic. Hell some of those options wouldn't make sense in most games. Is there a sex scene or love interest? If not, sexual identity of a character shouldn't matter. But if there is, an option might be nice to make the love interest a guy or a girl. Hell this would just be making it more in depth of an experience just by having an option (though it does double the work usually.) as long as it made sense. Sexual identity of a character in COD may not make sense but COD doesn't need it. COD's goal is a power fantasy through war. But you could allow someone to play as a woman or another race. Hell, I think they are doing that next COD making this the first change COD has had since 2009.
Gamers: as long as it is an option (which is what most SJW seem to want; just an option) choice actively enhances a game. There is little drawback to you (though there is slight drawback to the companies making the game. though not much).
SJW: As long as you don't be stupid and take this too far, I'll be on your side. But you can't nit-pick at everything like you usually do. Existing Characters should stay true. This just means we'll need new characters. But I'm sorry, Metal Gear Solid probably isn't going to get some Asexual Transexual Eskimo Paraplegic Character. I think.
We do have issues in our medium. Race, gender, etc are some of them and SJW (seriously easier to type) are right in that regard. We NEED a wider representation of heroes and villains. Not every hero should be a burly white dude. Part of Video Games' appeal is Escapism. I can be something I'm not. If I want to play as another race, I'll play as another race. If I want to play my character as a woman, I should be aloud too. Character options should always be available. (Personally I loved the fact you can do most types of people in RPGs, especially Bioware games.)
However, as with every argument there is two sides, especially more extreme sides. I'm not saying replace EVERY Burly white dude with an Asexual Trans Eskimo Paraplegic. Hell some of those options wouldn't make sense in most games. Is there a sex scene or love interest? If not, sexual identity of a character shouldn't matter. But if there is, an option might be nice to make the love interest a guy or a girl. Hell this would just be making it more in depth of an experience just by having an option (though it does double the work usually.) as long as it made sense. Sexual identity of a character in COD may not make sense but COD doesn't need it. COD's goal is a power fantasy through war. But you could allow someone to play as a woman or another race. Hell, I think they are doing that next COD making this the first change COD has had since 2009.
Gamers: as long as it is an option (which is what most SJW seem to want; just an option) choice actively enhances a game. There is little drawback to you (though there is slight drawback to the companies making the game. though not much).
SJW: As long as you don't be stupid and take this too far, I'll be on your side. But you can't nit-pick at everything like you usually do. Existing Characters should stay true. This just means we'll need new characters. But I'm sorry, Metal Gear Solid probably isn't going to get some Asexual Transexual Eskimo Paraplegic Character. I think.
There's no dichotomy between gamers and SJWs, so I'll assume you mean "conservative gamers" and "progressive gamers", respectively. Progressive gamers are those that want to make the gaming sphere more inclusive and diverse by addressing norms that may discourage certain people from getting into gaming (e.g. addressing the casual misogyny so more girls might be inclined to play). Conservative gamers (predominantly young, white males - the market the bulk of gaming targets) are understandably content with the current state of gaming, and believe any and all attempts to include people that aren't them should be done silently off in the corner somewhere ("girls can have their girl games, gays can have their gay games, but don't compromise the industry that's serving me so well!").
By their nature, conservatives will resist change, so there will always be that struggle. That struggle is exacerbated by progressives losing sight of their goal, not picking their battles, and throwing disproportionate outrage at little things (e.g. the Dragon's Crown fiasco).
In short, conservatives ("gamers") need to learn to share, and progressives ("SJWs") need to temper their outrage and make more reasonable criticisms.
By their nature, conservatives will resist change, so there will always be that struggle. That struggle is exacerbated by progressives losing sight of their goal, not picking their battles, and throwing disproportionate outrage at little things (e.g. the Dragon's Crown fiasco).
In short, conservatives ("gamers") need to learn to share, and progressives ("SJWs") need to temper their outrage and make more reasonable criticisms.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think "social justice warrior" is a just pejorative term used by their opponents. Nobody calls themselves "social justice warrior", at least not unironically.bloodmage2 said:
So you think people should just stay silent and wait for the games industry to read their minds? Why are you so against people offering their suggestions on how they could improve gaming? By the way, nobody is trying to legislate what people out to like.Batou667 said:
Why not think of it as them changing not because they HAVE TO, but because they WANT TO? If someone said "You know, blacks should have more representation so let's make this character black" would you have the same problem? They're not doing it out of fear of backlash, they're doing it because they want to be more progressive.SUPA FRANKY said:
A lot of these "social justice warriors" seem to spend most of their time talking about stuff rather than actually getting it done. Posting anon rants on the internet isn't fighting, people. People do it all the time on YouTube.
I'm going to express how competitive gaming communities feel about these kind of issues, since I probably have the most experience with competitive gaming communities.
When it comes to competitive gaming for fighting games and shooters, no one in general cares about what other people think, feel, or want. All that matters to the vast majority of these communities is improving their skill, pwning people lower skilled than themselves, and gaining reputation. The community surrounding fighting games started with the arcades. And the community starting with shooters started with Quake and Unreal Tournament. In both of these, the strongest survived and the weak were lambasted and made an example of. Trash talking, sexism, racism, and other negative things will happen because to competitive gamers all that matters is winning. They will do whatever it takes to make sure they win and that includes doing rude things. An entire culture grew up treating video games as like a war type of thing. All that matters is victory and to hell with honor or equality.
The sad truth that for many competitive gamers, you don't have an opinion until your good. In fact, your not even a person worth of respect or even dignity if your not good. All you are is cannon fodder for their dominance. Competitive gaming is more like a war than it is like a sport. So when people start talking about what is "fair or just", the reply your going to get from a pure competitive gamer is probably going to be along the lines of, "Lol, your stats are terrible, not listening". Or from fighting games you will get "OMFG, play and do well in a tournament before whining".
Is it right or wrong? Doesn't matter. You don't expect an entire culture that started with the arcade era and early online shooters to change it's views. Especially when for almost two decades, we grew up in an environment where it was basically get good or STFU and quit playing. This was before matchmaking systems were around and allowed lesser skilled players to play other lesser skilled players. This is where the majority which are casual gamers were DESTROYED by their superior higher skilled players every single match. Which honestly should be.
When it comes to competitive gaming for fighting games and shooters, no one in general cares about what other people think, feel, or want. All that matters to the vast majority of these communities is improving their skill, pwning people lower skilled than themselves, and gaining reputation. The community surrounding fighting games started with the arcades. And the community starting with shooters started with Quake and Unreal Tournament. In both of these, the strongest survived and the weak were lambasted and made an example of. Trash talking, sexism, racism, and other negative things will happen because to competitive gamers all that matters is winning. They will do whatever it takes to make sure they win and that includes doing rude things. An entire culture grew up treating video games as like a war type of thing. All that matters is victory and to hell with honor or equality.
The sad truth that for many competitive gamers, you don't have an opinion until your good. In fact, your not even a person worth of respect or even dignity if your not good. All you are is cannon fodder for their dominance. Competitive gaming is more like a war than it is like a sport. So when people start talking about what is "fair or just", the reply your going to get from a pure competitive gamer is probably going to be along the lines of, "Lol, your stats are terrible, not listening". Or from fighting games you will get "OMFG, play and do well in a tournament before whining".
Is it right or wrong? Doesn't matter. You don't expect an entire culture that started with the arcade era and early online shooters to change it's views. Especially when for almost two decades, we grew up in an environment where it was basically get good or STFU and quit playing. This was before matchmaking systems were around and allowed lesser skilled players to play other lesser skilled players. This is where the majority which are casual gamers were DESTROYED by their superior higher skilled players every single match. Which honestly should be.
except nobodys saying thatThe_Kodu said:
I think game companies should have more diverse protagonist, I think Aiden Peirce is the epitome of the industrys problem with diversity,
I'm not saying he should be banned or we should enforce rules for that kind of thing
again people interperet things in such stupid ways
if I hated something I wouldn't play/watch it...as for everything else I can find "faults" in ANYTHING weather or not I think those faults are issues depends on a lot of things
I personally just don't like the idea of an outsider who knows little about the subject to judge it, you wouldn't tell Yahtzee to review a movie and you wouldn't tell Rodger Ebert to review a video game. I feel like most of them only repeat issues we already know about and don't give solutions to said issues (To be fair, neither do the vast majority of us) I mean I quite like the way Jim sterling goes about "Social Justice" issues and I can agree with him on most subjects regarding the former. But the whole SJW thing is really almost the same thing as the neckbeard/fedorain term, mostly an insult that groups in those who show the worst of a whole, and in the case of SJW, I can't tell if it's a vocal minority who speak for the majority or a vocal minority who taint the ideals of the majority.
Ah fairy snuff, figured as much. But I didn't think there was anything wrong with the strippers: the section was about a shady deal taking place in the "crime city" of Venice and what better place for a shady deal then a risque cabaret/brothel? Especially in a post-apocalyptic society, where basic elements of fun civilization like books and video games are virtually non-existent. Though I do vaguely recall one of the dancers talking about needing new make-up and "feminine" stuff....Vault101 said:
Short answer, no. But that doesn't mean they don't push forward new themes/characters through their constant nagging.
The easiest way for me to think about it is like this.
SJWs have an ability. This ability, when activated, enrages the target but causes a debuff to the users charisma. If used too often on the same target the user gains an automatic debuff whenever they are within the same area as the target and any they associate with.
As I said, it doesn't make them bad, but when they don't understand how to converse with someone who is on the opposite side of the argument or neutral then nobody has a good time and friendships go up in flames.
The easiest way for me to think about it is like this.
SJWs have an ability. This ability, when activated, enrages the target but causes a debuff to the users charisma. If used too often on the same target the user gains an automatic debuff whenever they are within the same area as the target and any they associate with.
As I said, it doesn't make them bad, but when they don't understand how to converse with someone who is on the opposite side of the argument or neutral then nobody has a good time and friendships go up in flames.
Well... what's so wrong about this line of thinking, aside from the deliberately coarse way of putting it? We keep getting told that nobody's going to "take our games away" and that it's "not a zero-sum game". So, yes, I'd be perfectly happy if this hypothetical Liberal New Wave of gaming didn't visibly alter the kind of games I'm currently enjoying. Unless you're implying that we should expect gaming culture to alter, not just broaden?NoeL said:
No - far from staying silent, I think that the strongest message you can possibly send to the industry, and the one form of protest that they're 100% guaranteed to sit up and listen to, is by financially backing games/companies that reflect your tastes and values and conversely not buying games that you find boring or distasteful. If there's a demand, the market will cater to it, because what keeps the marketing executives at Activision up at night is the thought of how to get more money, not masterminding schemes about how they can best marginalise women and perpetuate racist stereotypes through the medium of pixels on a screen.NoeL said:
The "progressives" should put their money where their mouths are, and with the likes of Kickstarter that's easier than ever to actually do. What isn't constructive is to emulate conservative clowns like Jack Thompson in making flimsy claims that X in games actually causes X in real life; or else go the moralising, awareness-raising slacktivism route by endlessly clamouring about how "problematic" everything in games is. If that's not at least an implicit attempt to dictate to people and shame them into changing their consumption habits, I'm not sure what is.
You have to very polarized groups. My main issue with SJW is that a lot of them seem to bait controversy at most, and at least ignore context and intent. I've had people tell me how the option to kill hookers in GTA is misogynistic. I disagree in that GTA is a game about being a criminal in most cases. In a game where you kill cops for the hell of it, including numerous innocents, killing a hooker is the biggest tabu they could think of. talk about picking and choosing. You can argue real life relations and such (because violence against prostitutes is a legitimate real life issue), but there are a few problems.
Firstly: What about shooting innocents, is that not a big problem and relatable to events like newtown or sandy hook, real life tragedies.
Second: some people try to build a twinkie defence and effectively push the idea that these types of acts can inspire the real thing. I guess the odyssey caused quite the killing spree.
all this stems from lack of understanding or acknowledging the context and intent that a game presents. no matter what you want to ***** about there is a difference between a game like dragons crown (anatomically incorrect but relatively inoffensive game), and rapelay ( willfully offensive and inconsiderate game). another example would be mario and it's constant knight in shining armor trope. the game isn't sexist, it tells a bit of a story using a classic trope that has been around for ages.
A brief point tying into the above paragraph is having a bit of thick skin. some people are too easily offended. just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right, it doesn't even mean you have a case. life is too short to take everything so personally.
In both camps people are too stubborn to just open up for a minute and reflect on everything being said. SJW's stand on their "moral" soap box, and gamers rage. Both also need to recognise a directors creative and artistic freedom.
Gamers need to calm the fuck down too, they wont take away your dead or alive 5. it is a valid criticism to call certain aspects of a game a cop out or poorly designed if they are. it's also ok for someone to suggest a female protagonist and it won;t kill you to play as her.
overall, everyone is an ass, and nobody wants to admit to it.
Firstly: What about shooting innocents, is that not a big problem and relatable to events like newtown or sandy hook, real life tragedies.
Second: some people try to build a twinkie defence and effectively push the idea that these types of acts can inspire the real thing. I guess the odyssey caused quite the killing spree.
all this stems from lack of understanding or acknowledging the context and intent that a game presents. no matter what you want to ***** about there is a difference between a game like dragons crown (anatomically incorrect but relatively inoffensive game), and rapelay ( willfully offensive and inconsiderate game). another example would be mario and it's constant knight in shining armor trope. the game isn't sexist, it tells a bit of a story using a classic trope that has been around for ages.
A brief point tying into the above paragraph is having a bit of thick skin. some people are too easily offended. just because you're offended doesn't mean you're right, it doesn't even mean you have a case. life is too short to take everything so personally.
In both camps people are too stubborn to just open up for a minute and reflect on everything being said. SJW's stand on their "moral" soap box, and gamers rage. Both also need to recognise a directors creative and artistic freedom.
Gamers need to calm the fuck down too, they wont take away your dead or alive 5. it is a valid criticism to call certain aspects of a game a cop out or poorly designed if they are. it's also ok for someone to suggest a female protagonist and it won;t kill you to play as her.
overall, everyone is an ass, and nobody wants to admit to it.
Exactly this. In no other entertainment medium that I can think of would each new release be viewed as, and criticised as, some kind of exemplar (or whipping boy) for the medium as a whole. When a shitty movie gets released, people don't claim that it gives cinema in general a bad name, or that it makes them ashamed to call themselves a DVD-owner. Nor does this zero-sum mentality exist in other mediums - Classical music fans don't spend all their time pointing out flaws in Heavy Metal to try to make their own position look better, sculptors don't see themselves as in competition with digital artists, etc.StriderShinryu said:
It would be the hallmark of a truly grown-up medium if we could collectively accept that there's a plurality of demographics with a plurality of tastes, and the medium is big enough to accommodate us all. Not everything that gets released is for you, so it's OK if you don't like it. Don't buy it, don't play it, and concentrate on the parts of the medium that DO reflect your tastes. The "stop liking what I don't like!" stance is just childish.
SJW's are fundamentally incapable of getting along with anyone, because everyone is somehow guilty of something or other that fits their massive list of horrible, evil, crimes against society. No point in even trying to come to a common ground with them.
The normal people who want better representation of different races, genders, sexual orientations, etc. could easily find common ground with gamers, though. It just takes game companies starting to branch out a bit in terms of what stories they write. Maybe they could start bringing in outside writers who aren't middle class white males to try to better understand protagonists and characters that fall outside gaming's usual milieu.
The normal people who want better representation of different races, genders, sexual orientations, etc. could easily find common ground with gamers, though. It just takes game companies starting to branch out a bit in terms of what stories they write. Maybe they could start bringing in outside writers who aren't middle class white males to try to better understand protagonists and characters that fall outside gaming's usual milieu.