Its 'sensationalism' and we know it.

[Uhura]

Mario Kart 8 discussion is a good example of this. The reviewer didn't call anyone racist.

No, but the OP insinuated that he did with his misleading thread title, which led to the waves of people calling the reviewer an idiot for something he didn't do. OP went back and fixed it, but he was too late.

People jumping into rage mode without even checking out the actual review is a problem. This very forum has had multiple threads where the OPs have baited others into getting all furious over nothing. I don't think it's too much to ask people check the sources before they get all upset, unless they enjoy getting played.

And, from what I've seen in the article, the guy did a lot of beating around the bush. I don't have psychic powers or anything, but he might as well have said it. Then again, it's not like it was click-bait, right? I mean, we didn't have another issue about racism with another game just before then, right? Right?

This is another problem. The article wasn't actually a click-bait. The review in question was called "Mario Kart 8 Review (Wii U)". Click-bait refers to articles that have sensationalist titles that get people to click on them. There was nothing sensationalist about the review title. The article had multiple paragraphs and the writer mentions diversity only in one paragraph near the end of the review and then ends up giving the game a good score anyway.

The reviewer commented on the lack of diversity in a very level headed manner without accusing Nintendo of being racist assholes. He had a moderate approach to the topic. But apparently that is not good enough. Even you yourself seem to be interested reading malice into his words and making his statements much more sinister than they actually were ('beating around the bushes', 'he might as well have said it'). Doesn't your reaction seem at all alarming to you? How are we actually supposed to have any reasonable discussions about the topic when people jump from 'lack of diversity' into 'he thinks they are racists!'?

Hating on "SJWs" is currently fashionable in this community.

(And the description SJW is applied very liberally to anyone who talks about race/gender/orientation etc. It doesn't seem to matter if they actually are radical in any way or not.)

I would hope so. They're generally reactionary prudes who overcompensate for their own insecurities, getting offended for others when the group in question had little to no problems with it in the first place. Most of the controversies kicked up by them are over petty grievances that make normal people scratch their head over the idea that someone was actually offended by it, trivializing the issue to the point that legitimate complaints are glazed over in favor of avoiding the SJWs in question.

And it's not productive to lump up everyone who brings up issues in the portrayal of gender/race/orientation under the SJW label.

But mostly, I'm just tired of the negativity of it all. They're fucking videogames. They won't appeal to everyone all the time. Yes, I agree that some should try, but trying to make them is the wrong way to go about it. Calling those that disagree racist or sexist is an even worse way to go about it. Especially in Mario Kart, where most of the drivers are either thinly veiled clones of other stereotyped human characters or fucking turtles. You know, something the reviewer didn't seem keen on bringing up.

You don't have to participate in the discussions though. People will continue discussing these issues (often because the issues directly affect their enjoyment of games) and you will save yourself from a lot of headache by not going in those threads if they upset you.

I have been gaming for 20 years. I have put a lot of time and money in this hobby and when I talk about sexism etc. issues in gaming, I don't do it to shit all over my hobby. I think the same is true for a lot of others who like to talk about these issues.

 

[Cowabungaa]

fiction is just fiction.

I think this is the bit I have the biggest trouble with. No, fiction is not 'just' fiction. Just take a crash-course in modern literature and you'll see how fiction is used to spread cultural ideals, how important fiction is in our cultural lives. Videogames are no different, especially among younger parts of our society they're filling that important role more and more.

And that alone makes videogames worthy of being a serious topic regarding social issues. They, as cultural bearers, can definitely perpetuate things that are morally wrong and that's a worthy thing to address.

Video game sexism is teaching kids to be sexists.
Video game racism is teaching kids to be racists.
Video game violence is teaching kids to be murderers.

Oh wait.

It is neither that crude or that simple, obviously. That and teaching cultural values is not equal to causing direct behavioral changes. To discredit the idea that fiction does not teach us anything just because it does not cause such changes is simply not true. Again, just take a crash course in modern literature (starting from its root in post-Roman Europe) and you'll see what I mean. Videogames are the latest big actor in that ancient history of our cultural mechanisms.

Hell, if anything that's exactly the reason why some people shout that "Oh my God our kids are becoming killers!" nonsense, they completely over-reach when it comes to their influence. Yet at the same time that makes us defenders numb to the obvious effects fiction does have on our culture. A perfect example of why the OP rightly says that sensationalism is a risk to social issues.

From 12th century chivalric romance novels promoting ideal aristocratic behavior to 19th century British realism novels spreading the word about social inequalities, fiction has always had a profound impact on our culture. In literary form, theater and film. Why would videogames, being the humongous medium that they already are, be any different in that regard.

 

[CloudAtlas]

From 11th century chivalric romance novels promoting ideal aristocratic behavior to 19th century British realism novels spreading the word about social inequalities, fiction has always had a profound impact on our culture. In literary form, theater and film. Why would videogames, being the humongous medium that they already are, be any different in that regard.

I mean, I understand where this reaction is coming from, why gamers get all touchy here, I really do, but come on, they need to think about what they're actually saying. Which is that being exposed to a certain environmental influence (entertainment) couldn't possibly have any signficant influence on anyone whatsoever... which is just ridiculous.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Hating on "SJWs" is currently fashionable in this community.

(And the description SJW is applied very liberally to anyone who talks about race/gender/orientation etc. It doesn't seem to matter if they actually are radical in any way or not.)

I would hope so. They're generally reactionary prudes who overcompensate for their own insecurities, getting offended for others when the group in question had little to no problems with it in the first place.

And there I always thought that men who are unable to identify with female characters due to their gender, who prefer their female characters to be barely more than sex dolls instead of full-fledged strong characters, or who throw a fit when gay characters hit on them are the ones who're suffering from insecurities related to their sexual identities. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[gargantual]

Here's my thing, name black characters that,

A) The Main Character, not a sidekick/side character
B) Aren't criminal's/Haven't Committed a Crime
C) All Customizable Characters Don't Count,

And for good measure, have them well written. You'll then see my problem with the game industry's lack of diversity. I'm not angry, I'm not protesting, I'm asking for much actually. I just want to see more good character's like. I'll admit first and foremost, this shit has gotten ridicules at a certain point but still, more character's of a different race in already established series wouldn't hurt...

Theres Nothing wrong with a sincere request. We saw that from Tomadachi Life, and Nintendo's probably going to very receptive to it come a sequel. But I don't believe in verbally shaming developers as others have done for not showing diversity. It depends on the world they want to paint, and making caveats to other groups in the worlds they create demonstrates all the awareness I need. I feel everyone should make whatever floats their boat, not what they feel they should be compelled to write based on changes in society. A fantasy world is a free zone because they're not claiming it's based on our own.


I'd be the first person in line for an Ultimate Marvel feature film of the Black Panther, a Miles Morales Spiderman flick (with Donald Glover in the lead role), but If you look at Aaron Sylvester's post on page 3 of the thread Sexualization done right and see those production staff photos, there in lies which problem you're looking for. Diverse creative direction and pre-production staff leads to more open product. We're going to make whats reflective of our influences in all creative media, and its exception for people to write always outside of their own skin in popular fiction, not the rule.


IDK, for me I look at character before skin color, and that's the road to getting us the best black leads. Insufferable douchebag leads claiming moral or status superiority they can piss off, and only their struggle or total character will make me identify with as a player, not their skin color. That's like taking conservative Ron Christie and holding him up as some hero.

"See? He's accomplished and he black too! You'll get along just great!"

I'd say

"He's a sellout that speaks venom. Don't insult my intelligence. Get me a REAL black hero."


Look at how long sitcom coffee shop backgrounds took to color up the background. Most viewers saw that Seinfeld white default as just funny, rather than a social issue.


Hollywood jumped seemingly head over heels to attempt political correctness with cast mixing in films, and we just wound up with token characters still dying early, and terribly awkward interracial 'footloose' moments of people trying to relate in ways they never do in reality. and being shown more as pre 90's stereotypes in films. It took Neil Blomkamp's Elysium, to see random black dude as not a casualty. But for me judgement should be based on the story and the foundations the devs choose for themselves. I look at the game and say have they met what they explicit set out to accomplish. Whether they reflect earth in 2014 in their fiction is a secondary or tertiary consideration to me.

When I look at CJ Johnson and Franklin from the GTA series, I see these VG criminals as just the 'Boys in the hood' film angle that Scottish game developers genuinely wanted to explore, and they handled both men very well, seeing value in the story of young men feeling out of place with their living situation frustrated relationships, and pressures from corrupt outsiders. How many other companies outside of rock star would've completely mishandled that story or genuinely saw interest in '90s LA riots and following gang wars to begin with?

I don't factor in the idea that it perpetuates America's perception of the black male as criminal because in the real world that comes from ignorant people who've made up their minds to cling to fear, and not talk to us plainly and openly. If our own president needs a 'Luther' to be honest, the walls are being built up by ignorance in media, the same people who spread misinformation about real events and lives. Popular fiction doesn't hold that 'exact' same level of social reporting and responsibility.

Fortunately I've had people in my life of many different backgrounds who see through social smokescreens, and care about character more than facets.

So the same way I felt irritated at people jumping on the Rockstar, Midway, Id, Capcom, for making kill-fest video games, some of that extends to the shaming of developers for design choices. Rather than why would the make the choices they did, I'd be more concerned about how did they handle the subject matter they chose.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Who says? You? Do you fall into any one of those categories? Even if you did, you're just one person. How do you know how the collective thinks? It doesn't matter whether or not YOU see these issues as urgent, somebody obviously does, and I think the least you could is to try and at least understand the 'opposition,' and where they're coming from. It's a hell of a lot better than just getting pissed off and calling them 'irrational' if you ask me.

I understand them. That doesn't make their criticisms any less bizarre. I'd accept a game could benefit from some diversity were it to take place where humans are prominent. But when the rules of a world are so divorced from our own that humans themselves are an abnormality, bringing up its lack of diversity becomes questionable.

This is where some of the "not this shit again" attitudes come from when threads about these issues pop up. Every game is targeted regardless of tone or context.

In the case of Zero Suit Samus, the Power Armor *IS* Samus. Sure, a reward for 100% completion was a bikini shot, and I have a problem with that too. However, the Zero Suit is clearly for one thing only and that is to highlight the fact that Samus Aran is a woman and has a pair of tits and an arse.

That makes an assumption about the intent of the creators that we can't actually prove.

The suit makes no sense for combat because SHE HAS ONE FOR THAT! It's bad-ass and why isn't she wearing it? Because we want to see her tits and arse and we can't in the suit. ADMIT IT!

If we're talking about Zero Mission or Smash Brothers Brawl, its not working at the moment(again people, context). If we're talking about SB4, well its a separate thing altogether from Samus proper, so if you have a problem with the Zero suit, you have the choice of using the battle armor instead.

You ever thought maybe people have reasons for defending things that don't involve protecting what you perceived to be wank material?

But for the love of all that you hold dear, don't try to make out it isn't a terrible representation of Samus or women in general. Because by doing so, you are PERPETUATING the view that women are only to be ogled and stared at. Their abilities or intelligence mean nothing. YOU MIGHT NOT THINK THAT AT ALL, and the idea you do does insult you. But your beliefs don't matter, because by condoning or defending it, you reinforce it. Fact.

No...no that is not a fact. It's one interpretation of many for the purpose of a character's appearance.

 

[The Crispy Tiger]

Here's my thing, name black characters that,

A) The Main Character, not a sidekick/side character
B) Aren't criminal's/Haven't Committed a Crime
C) All Customizable Characters Don't Count,

And for good measure, have them well written. You'll then see my problem with the game industry's lack of diversity. I'm not angry, I'm not protesting, I'm asking for much actually. I just want to see more good character's like. I'll admit first and foremost, this shit has gotten ridicules at a certain point but still, more character's of a different race in already established series wouldn't hurt...

Theres Nothing wrong with a sincere request. We saw that from Tomadachi Life, and Nintendo's probably going to very receptive to it come a sequel. But I don't believe in verbally shaming developers as others have done for not showing diversity. It depends on the world they want to paint, and making caveats to other groups in the worlds they create demonstrates all the awareness I need. I feel everyone should make whatever floats their boat, not what they feel they should be compelled to write based on changes in society. A fantasy world is a free zone because they're not claiming it's based on our own.


I'd be the first person in line for an Ultimate Marvel feature film of the Black Panther, a Miles Morales Spiderman flick (with Donald Glover in the lead role), but If you look at Aaron Sylvester's post on page 3 of the thread Sexualization done right and see those production staff photos, there in lies which problem you're looking for. Diverse creative direction and pre-production staff leads to more open product. We're going to make whats reflective of our influences in all creative media, and its exception for people to write always outside of their own skin in popular fiction, not the rule.


IDK, for me I look at character before skin color, and that's the road to getting us the best black leads. Insufferable douchebag leads claiming moral or status superiority they can piss off, and only their struggle or total character will make me identify with as a player, not their skin color. That's like taking conservative Ron Christie and holding him up as some hero.

"See? He's accomplished and he black too! You'll get along just great!"

I'd say

"He's a sellout that speaks venom. Don't insult my intelligence. Get me a REAL black hero."


Look at how long sitcom coffee shop backgrounds took to color up the background. Most viewers saw that Seinfeld white default as just funny, rather than a social issue.


Hollywood jumped seemingly head over heels to attempt political correctness with cast mixing in films, and we just wound up with token characters still dying early, and terribly awkward interracial 'footloose' moments of people trying to relate in ways they never do in reality. and being shown more as pre 90's stereotypes in films. It took Neil Blomkamp's Elysium, to see random black dude as not a casualty. But for me judgement should be based on the story and the foundations the devs choose for themselves. I look at the game and say have they met what they explicit set out to accomplish. Whether they reflect earth in 2014 in their fiction is a secondary or tertiary consideration to me.

When I look at CJ Johnson and Franklin from the GTA series, I see these VG criminals as just the 'Boys in the hood' film angle that Scottish game developers genuinely wanted to explore, and they handled both men very well, seeing value in the story of young men feeling out of place with their living situation frustrated relationships, and pressures from corrupt outsiders. How many other companies outside of rock star would've completely mishandled that story or genuinely saw interest in '90s LA riots and following gang wars to begin with?

I don't factor in the idea that it perpetuates America's perception of the black male as criminal because in the real world that comes from ignorant people who've made up their minds to cling to fear, and not talk to us plainly and openly. If our own president needs a 'Luther' to be honest, the walls are being built up by ignorance in media, the same people who spread misinformation about real events and lives. Popular fiction doesn't hold that 'exact' same level of social reporting and responsibility.

Fortunately I've had people in my life of many different backgrounds who see through social smokescreens, and care about character more than facets.

So the same way I felt irritated at people jumping on the Rockstar, Midway, Id, Capcom, for making kill-fest video games, some of that extends to the shaming of developers for design choices. Rather than why would the make the choices they did, I'd be more concerned about how did they handle the subject matter they chose.

Dude, I totally see what you're saying. For me, as a writer, I just wish other writers had the same amount of variety that I do. I have a consistent amount of different people in my writing. The main character can be an overdramatic female drama queen with a love for violence, sex, and drugs, and then it could be a talking Koala, or a black guy engineer that's about to get kidnapped, because it's a horror movie and he's really in the wrong place at the wrong time. When I see that writers don't have this kind of variety, it just kinda makes me sad. I love the GTA series, and C.J and Franklin. But jesus, can we have a black character not in handcuff's. Even fucking Lee from The Walking Dead. And he's probably the most educated black character in all of video game history. The whole BIG BAD BLACK MAN stigma hasn't, and never will, go away. So when I see black criminals in games. I'm like, that's cool. Because we got... we got... I think there was a generic space game with a boring main character that had a black guy in it. It started with an H.

With that said, should we shame and belittle dev's for variety. Of course not, that's fucking stupid. But to ask and really think about this stuff. Yeah, I think it's good to think of this stuff. Political correctness is not a bad thing. It's in fact a very good thing. But it is also a thing that needs to not be taken overboard as to plunge us into shallow inoffensiveness and not keep pushing the envelope.

AND OF COURSE, it doesn't matter how many black characters you have if you don't have a well written one. I said the same thing about Star Wars Episode 7's casting. If he's written very well, it doesn't matter how many black characters are in the series, because casting should not be based on a quota but instead by the talent involved. Either way, I see your point, I just hope you can see mine.

 

[SilverBullets000]

Mario Kart 8 discussion is a good example of this. The reviewer didn't call anyone racist.

No, but the OP insinuated that he did with his misleading thread title, which led to the waves of people calling the reviewer an idiot for something he didn't do. OP went back and fixed it, but he was too late.

People jumping into rage mode without even checking out the actual review is a problem. This very forum has had multiple threads where the OPs have baited others into getting all furious over nothing. I don't think it's too much to ask people check the sources before they get all upset, unless they enjoy getting played.

Can't say I'm in disagreement with that sentiment, but that's still the way it went down.

And, from what I've seen in the article, the guy did a lot of beating around the bush. I don't have psychic powers or anything, but he might as well have said it. Then again, it's not like it was click-bait, right? I mean, we didn't have another issue about racism with another game just before then, right? Right?

This is another problem. The article wasn't actually a click-bait. The review in question was called "Mario Kart 8 Review (Wii U)". Click-bait refers to articles that have sensationalist titles that get people to click on them. There was nothing sensationalist about the review title. The article had multiple paragraphs and the writer mentions diversity only in one paragraph near the end of the review and then ends up giving the game a good score anyway.

The reviewer commented on the lack of diversity in a very level headed manner without accusing Nintendo of being racist assholes. He had a moderate approach to the topic. But apparently that is not good enough. Even you yourself seem to be interested reading malice into his words and making his statements much more sinister than they actually were ('beating around the bushes', 'he might as well have said it'). Doesn't your reaction seem at all alarming to you? How are we actually supposed to have any reasonable discussions about the topic when people jump from 'lack of diversity' into 'he thinks they are racists!'?

Because it's Mario Kart, honestly. It's a game about racing cartoon turtles, dinosaurs, and bad Italian stereotypes. That, as well as the fact that the words black (or ethnic, for that matter) and stereotype have never, ever been a good combination. Also, moderate is considering Mario white despite being Italian? Counting the baby versions of a character as separate characters? The evil versions of the characters to? The guy brings up the fact that there's so many "white" characters, despite most of them being thinly veiled versions of the same characters in different colored overalls and dresses. There's discussing a lack of diversity, and then there's just reaching to bring up an issue at all, and he was doing some serious reaching there.

Besides, the guy wouldn't have brought it up at all if Far Cry 4 hadn't just kicked up a shit storm about it. I'll concede that calling it click-bait was actually wrong of me though, but it still stinks of a follow-the-leader mentality.

Hating on "SJWs" is currently fashionable in this community.

(And the description SJW is applied very liberally to anyone who talks about race/gender/orientation etc. It doesn't seem to matter if they actually are radical in any way or not.)

I would hope so. They're generally reactionary prudes who overcompensate for their own insecurities, getting offended for others when the group in question had little to no problems with it in the first place. Most of the controversies kicked up by them are over petty grievances that make normal people scratch their head over the idea that someone was actually offended by it, trivializing the issue to the point that legitimate complaints are glazed over in favor of avoiding the SJWs in question.

And it's not productive to lump up everyone who brings up issues in the portrayal of gender/race/orientation under the SJW label.

Just as it isn't productive to label those who disagree with the stances they bring up as racist/sexist/homophobic. Still, you're right. My apologies, I guess the more reactionary of the group gets to me a little too much sometimes. Makes me too eager to react and see things where there is none myself. [sub]Consider that me also conceding to the malice thing you brought up earlier.[/sub]

But mostly, I'm just tired of the negativity of it all. They're fucking videogames. They won't appeal to everyone all the time. Yes, I agree that some should try, but trying to make them is the wrong way to go about it. Calling those that disagree racist or sexist is an even worse way to go about it. Especially in Mario Kart, where most of the drivers are either thinly veiled clones of other stereotyped human characters or fucking turtles. You know, something the reviewer didn't seem keen on bringing up.

You don't have to participate in the discussions though. People will continue discussing these issues (often because the issues directly affect their enjoyment of games) and you will save yourself from a lot of headache by not going in those threads if they upset you.

I have been gaming for 20 years. I have put a lot of time and money in this hobby and when I talk about sexism etc. issues in gaming, I don't do it to shit all over my hobby. I think the same is true for a lot of others who like to talk about these issues.

Which is why I normally don't. I just brought it up here because it seemed especially silly in the game in question. I can see discussing the issue in something like Hitman or CoD, but bringing it front and center for a game that brings out stereotypical elements of a race is just asking for trouble, which is why I brought it up.

17 years myself. I'm not against the discussions, really, just the juvenile preconceptions of the people who enjoy them and the nitpicking.

 

[SilverBullets000]

Hating on "SJWs" is currently fashionable in this community.

(And the description SJW is applied very liberally to anyone who talks about race/gender/orientation etc. It doesn't seem to matter if they actually are radical in any way or not.)

I would hope so. They're generally reactionary prudes who overcompensate for their own insecurities, getting offended for others when the group in question had little to no problems with it in the first place.

And there I always thought that men who are unable to identify with female characters due to their gender, who prefer their female characters to be barely more than sex dolls instead of full-fledged strong characters, or who throw a fit when gay characters hit on them are the ones who're suffering from insecurities related to their sexual identities. Thanks for clearing that up.

I'm not opposed to any of those things; I just don't like it when people jump down a game's throat right off the bat for otherwise petty reasons. It's why I enjoy the idea of Saint's Rows' character customizer, even if I've never gotten around to that game yet.
There's a time and a place, though. Bringing it up every time you see a woman's cleavage is a good way to have people ignore you, as opposed to bringing it up when Samus is having a random PTSD fit for seeing her nemesis for the thirtieth time and being otherwise completely incompetent most of the game.

 

[90sgamer]

I would've thought the witchhunting in action game tropes would be an internet battlefield that we all crossed in 2012-2013 and graduated from, but like TMZ or The Murdoch empire clamoring for the latest buzz and celebrity low moments to come out of their anuses every week, some of the press voices out there is becoming or has become 'The SUN'/'The Inquirer' when discussing social justice in video game themes. And some of us don't make it any better. What about justice in 'game design fundamentals? skill trees vs. paywalls (I.E. internet panhandling) and bad dlc pricing? That's not 'serious' enough anymore? We're still paying for those problems. Those latter mechanical and price issues are big issues that make a lot of games suffer and underperform.


But this 'cosmetic' crusades of video game themes is annoyingly reminiscent of the fake bohemia and fake activism that squandered underground hip hop and rock. The culture became a feather in the hat of 'enlightened' valley kids. who tossed the artform aside faster than psuedo earthers in the movie Biodome. Always stirring shit when its not that big, and looking for minions.

Its ridiculous that nothing can exist for its own fun and lunacy, but that it always it has to be some dumb 'symbol of oppresion' all the time. No wonder it gets so spoiled in gaming discussion, Whether the arguments made about a game's ASSUMED sociopolitics are right or wrong.

Representation issues may feel very real for some gamers out there, but the sheer volume of accusations of bigotry in action games is just stupid now and too flimsy to call it a valid movement. We read into shit too much.

This is how Occupy movement lost its luster, with all our 'knowledge' decsend into splintered mob wars making shit out of every little thing, instead of picking our battles, and learning from each other, and working effectively. I'm not crazy about the old testament, but on a large scale these fringe media fights make the community look like BABEL. as in we seriously dont understand each other, and if thats not a goal we're working for then the arguing should settle when it becomes pointless. To let things cool down eventually and have some thread progression with some LOLs and shared understanding, demonstrates our rationality. A largely uninvolved-enthusiast-game-machine like IGN.com shouldn't have to feel compelled to jump in on Far Cry 4 cries of racism to tell everyone to chill the hell out 'because its now become a business issue.

If that's not a CLEAR sign that these discussions, have become unproductive, then I don't know what is.


Its obessesive sensationalism picking at Far Cry 4, Zero Suit Samus, Mass Effect, even Mario Kart 8? about sexism and racism under some shallow hope that devs will be scared into from now on only making the safest archetypes and themes possible. These devs aren't bigots, they're people like us and it trivializes real world problems worse than hollywood-fake-cause movies ever could, and judges peoples' 3D art unecessarily. If those artists happen to have super fetishes that's them.


I'm of the opinion that if its a game that's mechanically supposed to allow for the fullest of individual, diverse expression and community like an MMO, and it denies it, then YES it can at times be a social and customer service issue.


But anything thats totally 'authored' by someone else with chosen characters with a beggining, middle and end is ultimately subjective. We have to go in with that disclaimer, not expecting that all themes and features were pre tailor-made to serve us completely. That is impossible. Because we're different people with different tastes, beliefs, emotional thresholds, and self image. and people at large are going to do or make whatever the hell they want to. Its part of why they got in this biz in the first place. They're not 60-100 hour workweek programmers, writers and 3D artists for shit they're not actively interested in making.

At some point, after lambasting action games, people gotta move on. Enough of this "if you're not 100 % agreement, you're against us." That attitude is antagonistic to free thought, and we know facists in history, or religionuts of the past have used the same words and sentiments to scare rational independent moderate people into their ranks. It doesn't matter what cause one stands for. People have to arrive there of their own mind and accord. No forum or twitter crusader is going to carry gamers and consumers to some stage of enlightenment. No REAL person is defined by an issue stance. We all have issues that we're left or right of center on and fiction is just fiction.

We can't have folks telling people how to think in such a free spirited, fantasy action loving community, and constantly hammering on players their genre of choice is socially horrendous. Thats Jack Thompson bs and inside our community too. The gamers ya'll disagree with arent idiots on the other end of an internet connection. They're also people, with their own responsibilities and groundings. We are told from the outset we are engaging in subjective fiction. Spin news, fake moral panics and tabloid click bait do not give such a disclaimer, but they can generate the wrong kinda followers.

I had to take a social-justice class yrs ago in college as part of a general social sci requirement, and man I seriously miss how 'mediation' 'agreeing to dissagree' and 'mutual understanding' were common themes in that class. Any student who tried to impose solutions on real world issues was taken down some notches, even if the professor knew their side was right. because pragmatists have a far better track record in solutions than 'crusaders', and for my final paper when everyone wanted to talk about Darfur, Terry Schiavo, North Korea, and Katrina etc, I remember choosing Media Sensationalism as the most dangerous SJ issue.



Clearly when multiplayer communities have dispelled the myths we form about each other, have bridged gaps, and we're still building these walls back up on clickbait. I can see I wasn't wrong.

Well said, as are your subsequent responses.

 

[K12]

I think the fundamental mistake that people (on both sides of the argument) make with all the social justicey type topics is that it is about the general trend and not specific instances.

When someone talks about a anti such and such trend in gaming (e.g. "black guy dialogue" where "************" and "awwwwwww sheeeeetttt!" are 50% of a black guy's lines") and lists examples.

This should not mean that all the games which contain those examples are made by racists and the games shouldn't exist. It is just a symptom of a more general problem which could be improved with people having a greater awareness that this stuff is annoying and limiting.

I don't know about anyone else but I seem to see far more "why can't SJWs shut the hell up" comments than anybody actually making a "this game is racist/sexist/XXXist" comment.

The "soundbite" approach to reporting feeds this shit more than anything else so the best thing to do is always to go to the source and where possible give benefit of the doubt.

There are dickheads on every side of ever conflict and debate throughout time and space. Make sure you're dismissing the point rather than just complaining at people you don't like.

 

[The Crispy Tiger]

Here's my thing, name black characters that,

A) The Main Character, not a sidekick/side character
B) Aren't criminal's/Haven't Committed a Crime
C) All Customizable Characters Don't Count,

And for good measure, have them well written. You'll then see my problem with the game industry's lack of diversity. I'm not angry, I'm not protesting, I'm asking for much actually. I just want to see more good character's like. I'll admit first and foremost, this shit has gotten ridicules at a certain point but still, more character's of a different race in already established series wouldn't hurt...

Black
True Crime Streets of New York
A Pimp RPG (it's technically true you're not a criminal yet in it)
Left 4 Dead 1 & 2
Shadowman
Team Fortress 2 (Demoman)
Aveline de Grandpré (AC 3 liberation)


Of Eastern origin
Shenmue
Strangle hold
Jade (BG&E)

Black but have technically committed crimes
CJ GTA SA
50 cent in blood on the sand and bulletproof
Torgue (The suffering)


Thats from a few minutes thinking and a google search. There probably are more, though it must be said that it's not a great list and more diversity would be a good thing for gaming and there is an issue of under-representation.

Okay, let's knock some out.

Left 4 Dead doesn't count to me because there's no real story or character development, exact same for Team Fortress 2. Shadowman is a VOODOO man. If don't know if they did it with grace, but I'll look it up. True Crime might be good, but I haven't played it so, there is that. Assassin's Creed really is the only one that stands out. It has not one but two good black character's in it's series DLC. That doesn't let the game industry off the hook since this isn't the majority and half of those games are obscure and the other is DLC. You're right about the Eastern descent, so I got give you credit where credit is due. Thanks for the great list thought!

 

[Signa]

At some point, after lambasting action games, people gotta move on. Enough of this "if you're not 100 % agreement, you're against us." That attitude is antagonistic to free thought, and we know facists in history, or religionuts of the past have used the same words and sentiments to scare rational independent moderate people into their ranks. It doesn't matter what cause one stands for. People have to arrive there of their own mind and accord. No forum or twitter crusader is going to carry gamers and consumers to some stage of enlightenment. No REAL person is defined by an issue stance. We all have issues that we're left or right of center on and fiction is just fiction.

This. This right here. I have slowly become more anti-gay/feminist/transgender/hot-topic-of-the-day over the years because of this mentality. It's odd, because I fully support each of those movements in spirit, but the moment you tell me that I'm a bad person for not caring enough, or lumping me in with "them[footnote]You know, those guys. The one keeping them down![/footnote]," I start to hate the community, and in turn, it sours what they are about.

Case in point: I no longer give two shits about feminism, and the moment you use the word cis in a sentence, I stop taking anything you have to say on anything seriously. At that point, you've become a creature of complete irrationality, and anything you believe probably isn't worth believing myself. This has nothing to do with if I believe woman should be equal (I totally do), but it's a direct result of how the community has handled itself.

 

[MysticSlayer]

What about justice in 'game design fundamentals? skill trees vs. paywalls (I.E. internet panhandling) and bad dlc pricing? That's not 'serious' enough anymore? We're still paying for those problems. Those latter mechanical and price issues are big issues that make a lot of games suffer and underperform.

No one is stoping you from having those conversations if you want to have them. There's plenty of room to talk about game design, potentially corrupt business tactics, and social justice issues without having to sacrifice any of them. If you don't want to participate in discussions on one of those topics, feel free to not do so. No one is forcing you. However, so long as social issues are important to people, we'll continue seeing the discussion among those people.

Its ridiculous that nothing can exist for its own fun and lunacy, but that it always it has to be some dumb 'symbol of oppresion' all the time. No wonder it gets so spoiled in gaming discussion, Whether the arguments made about a game's ASSUMED sociopolitics are right or wrong.

Representation issues may feel very real for some gamers out there, but the sheer volume of accusations of bigotry in action games is just stupid now and too flimsy to call it a valid movement. We read into shit too much.

Just because some people take things too far doesn't mean it isn't valid. It means that there are some non-issues being brought up among the list of more valid criticisms. Even then, what is and isn't valid criticism is sort of hard to define until someone actually does bring it up and we have a chance to discuss it.

With that said, not all issues are intentional, and I'd imagine few respectable people would argue that everyone is trying to be sexist, racist, homophobic, etc. The problem that arises is that we often hold subconscious prejudices that come out to varying degrees, and part of the issue of bringing up problems is to challenge those prejudices that the creator may have (though it is entirely possible they don't have it). Part of solving a problem is people bringing attention to it, and if someone perceives that there is a lack of representation of a particular gender, race, or what-have-you, then it is certainly worthwhile to bring that up if for no other reason than to alert the creator that they may have unintentionally done something that offends a particular group or makes it feel excluded.

But anything thats totally 'authored' by someone else with chosen characters with a beggining, middle and end is ultimately subjective. We have to go in with that disclaimer, not expecting that all themes and features were pre tailor-made to serve us completely. That is impossible. Because we're different people with different tastes, beliefs, emotional thresholds, and self image. and people at large are going to do or make whatever the hell they want to. Its part of why they got in this biz in the first place. They're not 60-100 hour workweek programmers, writers and 3D artists for shit they're not actively interested in making.

And creative freedom is not an excuse to abuse that freedom, and being allowed to create what you want to create doesn't protect you from criticism. If you want to use a story to further a racist agenda, then you're free to do that, but don't be surprised if people call you out for it. Sure, most game creators probably aren't that malicious, but they still aren't free from criticism.

Brilliant Post! Unfortunately, it's going to be "Too Long; Didn't Read" for the people who need to read this...

What I've discovered with people who argue passionately about social justice issues, most of them are just doing it as an excuse to rage against an anonymous person. All the while feeling morally superior...

Once again, thanks for taking the time for making this thread. I appreciate it, but it will fly over head of most of the people you trying to reach with it.

So in the process of demeaning people for "raging against an anonymous person...while feeling morally superior" you...rage against anonymous people while acting morally superior...

Do people want well written characters or ones just written to fill a quota ?

But there comes one of the big questions: Why are they "just filling a quota"? Why isn't it that better representation isn't coming naturally? That's not to say there is intentional exclusion, but it does pose questions about potentially subconscious issues with the way the person views the world and the diverse people that make it up.

Again, the discussion isn't to say that creators are being intentionally racist, sexist, etc. It is an attempt to point out issues in representation so that people become aware of their possibly unintended exclusion or poor representation of certain groups. The goal is that it becomes more natural to better represent them, not something to be forced; but you're never going to get there if you don't start questioning the underlying problems.

 

[Uhura]

Because it's Mario Kart, honestly. It's a game about racing cartoon turtles, dinosaurs, and bad Italian stereotypes. That, as well as the fact that the words black (or ethnic, for that matter) and stereotype have never, ever been a good combination. Also, moderate is considering Mario white despite being Italian? Counting the baby versions of a character as separate characters? The evil versions of the characters to? The guy brings up the fact that there's so many "white" characters, despite most of them being thinly veiled versions of the same characters in different colored overalls and dresses. There's discussing a lack of diversity, and then there's just reaching to bring up an issue at all, and he was doing some serious reaching there.

I don't think Mario Kart should have immunity in this regard. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to want more diversity in kids games. It doesn't mean that you have to agree with what he said or think it's an issue but I don't think it's wise to immediately shrug off that type of discussions as social justice hysteria either.

What do you mean by that comment about calling Mario white when he is Italian?

Besides, the guy wouldn't have brought it up at all if Far Cry 4 hadn't just kicked up a shit storm about it.

Can't agree with this, mostly because the review was released on the same day as that Far Cry 4 photo was revealed (I think the review was also released earlier in the day than the FC4 press photo). At the time, there wasn't really any drama about the FC4 photo. That came later during the week.

Just as it isn't productive to label those who disagree with the stances they bring up as racist/sexist/homophobic. Still, you're right. My apologies, I guess the more reactionary of the group gets to me a little too much sometimes. Makes me too eager to react and see things where there is none myself. [sub]Consider that me also conceding to the malice thing you brought up earlier.[/sub]

I agree. It is counter productive to dish out those labels without a good reason (and I've seen those labels applied to people who did not deserve them quite a few times). There are rude and OTT people in every community and sometimes even the 'good' peeps need to take a break from heated conversations. I think the entire community would benefit from ignoring the more radical voices in the argument, really. There is too much rage-baiting going around.

 

[gargantual]

What about justice in 'game design fundamentals? skill trees vs. paywalls (I.E. internet panhandling) and bad dlc pricing? That's not 'serious' enough anymore? We're still paying for those problems. Those latter mechanical and price issues are big issues that make a lot of games suffer and underperform.

No one is stoping you from having those conversations if you want to have them. There's plenty of room to talk about game design, potentially corrupt business tactics, and social justice issues without having to sacrifice any of them. If you don't want to participate in discussions on one of those topics, feel free to not do so. No one is forcing you. However, so long as social issues are important to people, we'll continue seeing the discussion among those people.

Its ridiculous that nothing can exist for its own fun and lunacy, but that it always it has to be some dumb 'symbol of oppresion' all the time. No wonder it gets so spoiled in gaming discussion, Whether the arguments made about a game's ASSUMED sociopolitics are right or wrong.

Representation issues may feel very real for some gamers out there, but the sheer volume of accusations of bigotry in action games is just stupid now and too flimsy to call it a valid movement. We read into shit too much.

Just because some people take things too far doesn't mean it isn't valid. It means that there are some non-issues being brought up among the list of more valid criticisms. Even then, what is and isn't valid criticism is sort of hard to define until someone actually does bring it up and we have a chance to discuss it.

With that said, not all issues are intentional, and I'd imagine few respectable people would argue that everyone is trying to be sexist, racist, homophobic, etc. The problem that arises is that we often hold subconscious prejudices that come out to varying degrees, and part of the issue of bringing up problems is to challenge those prejudices that the creator may have (though it is entirely possible they don't have it). Part of solving a problem is people bringing attention to it, and if someone perceives that there is a lack of representation of a particular gender, race, or what-have-you, then it is certainly worthwhile to bring that up if for no other reason than to alert the creator that they may have unintentionally done something that offends a particular group or makes it feel excluded.

But anything thats totally 'authored' by someone else with chosen characters with a beggining, middle and end is ultimately subjective. We have to go in with that disclaimer, not expecting that all themes and features were pre tailor-made to serve us completely. That is impossible. Because we're different people with different tastes, beliefs, emotional thresholds, and self image. and people at large are going to do or make whatever the hell they want to. Its part of why they got in this biz in the first place. They're not 60-100 hour workweek programmers, writers and 3D artists for shit they're not actively interested in making.

And creative freedom is not an excuse to abuse that freedom, and being allowed to create what you want to create doesn't protect you from criticism. If you want to use a story to further a racist agenda, then you're free to do that, but don't be surprised if people call you out for it. Sure, most game creators probably aren't that malicious, but they still aren't free from criticism.

Brilliant Post! Unfortunately, it's going to be "Too Long; Didn't Read" for the people who need to read this...

What I've discovered with people who argue passionately about social justice issues, most of them are just doing it as an excuse to rage against an anonymous person. All the while feeling morally superior...

Once again, thanks for taking the time for making this thread. I appreciate it, but it will fly over head of most of the people you trying to reach with it.

So in the process of demeaning people for "raging against an anonymous person...while feeling morally superior" you...rage against anonymous people while acting morally superior...

Do people want well written characters or ones just written to fill a quota ?

But there comes one of the big questions: Why are they "just filling a quota"? Why isn't it that better representation isn't coming naturally? That's not to say there is intentional exclusion, but it does pose questions about potentially subconscious issues with the way the person views the world and the diverse people that make it up.

Again, the discussion isn't to say that creators are being intentionally racist, sexist, etc. It is an attempt to point out issues in representation so that people become aware of their possibly unintended exclusion or poor representation of certain groups. The goal is that it becomes more natural to better represent them, not something to be forced; but you're never going to get there if you don't start questioning the underlying problems.

I dunno if you could fully quantify KissingSunlight's moral superiority from that post. It reads more like what the poster is perceiving from arguments regarding social justice in fictional media online. Thats a concept that we play with too much 'moral superiority' no one can claim that. We don't know what its like to walk in another persons shoes. I never in my words say that people dont have the right to criticize media from a sociopolitical standpoint. If anyone feels they're on an island calling out regressiveness among a swath of many gamer dudes opinions I'm saying thats not the case. We're not alone. Our views vary greatly in between these sides.

I feel that that games that tread into dark waters of violence, race sex, religion is free to be percieved in all kinds of ways at its lowest and at its highlights and most inspirational. Look at the differing opinions of black pundit commentary or Spike Lee on Django Unchained. People weren't in a straight line of offense. Views differed. Or even the fact Tom Hall and John Romero at Id even argued over making DOOM in the first place. But these things happened. Personal offense is our moment of self definition. we can express that but understand its not going to be the same for everyone, and its not immediately bad if other gamers don't see the same level of taboo. Other gamers think its now an internet barometer of how good or bad they are as a person by not being infuriated at every creative misunderstanding that shows up in popular media.

As to asking why devs haven't made natural efforts to match up with representation. Theres no real social time barometer, and their social responsibility of entertainment makers is partial. As opposed to news folks who mishandle topics and claim themselves to be an authority on subject matter with the premise their content should be understood as simple hard facts and data. When they fuck that up, sometimes society polarizes unnecessarily on issues, people who commit acts of tremendous evil and inhumanity get turned into pop culture avatars. Foolish opinions of everyday people are reinforced when they're told who to hate or demonize this week. Names are named etc.

mass internet criticism has its power too, to discourage people from seeing or playing media they are actually equipped to form their own balanced opinions about. And we dont realize devs stress more over outside criticism as opposed to filmmakers who can choose narrower established markets. Sam Houser was depressed after Congress put Rockstar in that committee inquisition about GTA San Andreas and the sex-anims that went into the hot coffee mod. Grandstanders who don't play games nor understand this stuff is made out of curiosity, not propaganda. You can tell how deliberate pathological controlling infomedia, is different from games that let people unplug, or write different despite giving them a power fantasy.

Making it more natural for devs to create inclusive worlds will be a natural process when they hash those creative decisions out in a diverse pre-production room. When games speak louder than forums wars, articles, and ignorant physical goods marketers. and weigh the opinions of their own team before models and levels are built. it depends on the story, the world, how much the artist claims its going to be based on our world or their own wacky universe. I can't bring myself to be disgusted for them wanting to stay in their zone. If I was a creative director I'd want to maintain that standard and show diversity out of interest rather than fear of market perception. We don't say "wait I don't know enough about all cultures, lives and opinions in the world to qualify to write this book or game or comic." We start with what we do know, blaze forward and learn afterwards. They may have to consider the audience, but we have things such as target marketing where people can go raw and make something risque for their crowd.

I would NEVER even think of asking female vamp series writers to step outside of their skin, and write some more dudes when they've constructed their wonderful dark personal fantasies, where they can be the most raw and honest. That's their shit. Their domain, and while requests are nice its their work and their decision. So its the same with any artist who wants to paint a subjective world. Its so easy to offend people that some slack should be given based on how deep the offense is.

So some of this reaction you see are gamers tired of feeling that they're being vilified by proxy when their overall approval of a game mets with community criticism in some cases that picks out negative elements in a game and tries to project definitions in forum arguements of who the gamers are as a person. I don't see comments like "it was offensive to me, but I'm not judging you man, ease up." Instead we read blanket judgements and presume things about other posters mindsets. You wouldn't like people making judgements about you based on really kitschy NSFW stuff you're into. Neither would I or any of us. Especially when WHY we like or forgive such media isn't asked.

Its not a perfect reading of how we would treat other people in our lives or conduct ourselves. I have people making assumptions of me ' take your own advice ' it sounds (and I'm just saying it sounds like they've constructed some presumed online brute whose grabbing his nethers barking fire down upon anyone calling for diversity in games. I'm thinking like...sorry...No bigot lives here. I don't troll or call people names, or insult peoples livelihood blindly on forums, or call people's opinions unworthy and ignorant, when I argue I try to look for understanding, and bring up points that don't appear to be as heavily considered and reintroduce them into the discussion. I ask questions. I simply say there's some validity to be had from others who don't take as much umbrage with game imagery, and its rooted in intelligence, not ignorance. But not as many weigh their responses until they see they've touched a nerve online. How healthy is that discourse compared to the influence of risque video games that don't judge their participants? Making presumptions about real people is a dangerous line I try at least to watch for. I'm sure you do too.

 

[SilverBullets000]

Because it's Mario Kart, honestly. It's a game about racing cartoon turtles, dinosaurs, and bad Italian stereotypes. That, as well as the fact that the words black (or ethnic, for that matter) and stereotype have never, ever been a good combination. Also, moderate is considering Mario white despite being Italian? Counting the baby versions of a character as separate characters? The evil versions of the characters to? The guy brings up the fact that there's so many "white" characters, despite most of them being thinly veiled versions of the same characters in different colored overalls and dresses. There's discussing a lack of diversity, and then there's just reaching to bring up an issue at all, and he was doing some serious reaching there.

I don't think Mario Kart should have immunity in this regard. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to want more diversity in kids games. It doesn't mean that you have to agree with what he said or think it's an issue but I don't think it's wise to immediately shrug off that type of discussions as social justice hysteria either.

Fair enough. I still feel like the reviewer is cheating, but whatever. It's like I said before, there are ways to go about it without feeling like they're shoe-horning it in for the sake of those complaining. I just feel like it could go wrong as many ways as it could go right, especially with Mario being the stereotypical little Italian that he is.

There is also the fact that the game was made by a Japanese studio and the fact that Japan in of itself isn't very varied when it comes to minorities. Not saying it's an excuse, but it does give a little insight on why it is that way.

What do you mean by that comment about calling Mario white when he is Italian?

Strictly speaking, caucasian males are white males with European descent. Italy's people have their own origin, therefore calling them white is incorrect because they're their own ethnicity.

Besides, the guy wouldn't have brought it up at all if Far Cry 4 hadn't just kicked up a shit storm about it.

Can't agree with this, mostly because the review was released on the same day as that Far Cry 4 photo was revealed (I think the review was also released earlier in the day than the FC4 press photo). At the time, there wasn't really any drama about the FC4 photo. That came later during the week.

Oh, seriously? Well, that's what I get for assuming something. I really need to stop doing that.
Unfortunately, my searching isn't bringing up the original photo anywhere, or the date for it. Do you mind giving me a little clarification on that?

Just as it isn't productive to label those who disagree with the stances they bring up as racist/sexist/homophobic. Still, you're right. My apologies, I guess the more reactionary of the group gets to me a little too much sometimes. Makes me too eager to react and see things where there is none myself. [sub]Consider that me also conceding to the malice thing you brought up earlier.[/sub]

I agree. It is counter productive to dish out those labels without a good reason (and I've seen those labels applied to people who did not deserve them quite a few times). There are rude and OTT people in every community and sometimes even the 'good' peeps need to take a break from heated conversations. I think the entire community would benefit from ignoring the more radical voices in the argument, really. There is too much rage-baiting going around.

Agreed.

 

[Bakuryukun]

This topic: I DON'T THINK THAT THINGS THAT OTHER PEOPLE THINK ARE IMPORTANT ARE IMPORTANT.

Good for you buddy.

 

[InkySpines]

This isn't really limited to games. Games were probably the last medium infected (gasp...otherizing language!). I originally started reading the Escapist because that crap wasn't as ubiquitous as every where else.

What we are really witnessing is the death of Western Liberalism. Neo-Liberalism is its zombie corpse.
PSA to Americans: look up what those words actually mean.

I don't think it is particularly helpful to Chicken-and-Egg whether this is due to the fault of the Left or Right, its a continuous pendulum swing between both that crushes independent thought, and currently the Left is doing its utmost to match the mark set by the Right last decade.

The feedback loop is only going to intensify, as our desperation grows we are just going to lash out at each other more and cripple our ability to actually deal with tangible problems which will increase our desperation.

And can we stop using the phrase "Straw-man Argument"? It has become a tiresome and lazy attempt to derail discussion. There are most definitely real not-straw people who advocate whatever noxious opinion you can imagine. If it is a real straw-man, demonstrate why the opinion presented couldn't be held by anyone (or even a substantial minority.)

 

[InkySpines]

Strictly speaking, caucasian males are white males with European descent. Italy's people have their own origin, therefore calling them white is incorrect because they're their own ethnicity.

You mean like the Roman Empire? The progenitor state, directly or indirectly, for EVERY European country?
I really need to rethink this whole internet forum thing...