Jimquisition: The FarCry Racism Adventure

[Vault101]

And now let's pat ourselves on the back for not being silly SJW'swho ruin everything

 

[MisterM2402]

I am absolutely flabbergasted that anyone could look at the dude in the pink suit and think he's white. Like really, do you not know how asian people look? Pro-tip, white people don't have epicanthic folds.

He's clearly either a Yakuza or Hong Kong Triad style gangster with bleached hair. Although the lack of any visible tattoos inclines me to think he's a Triad member. Or, possibly even a native of the region attempting to ape the mannerisms of the more sophisticated and flamboyant gangsters from the city.

Really? I just don't see it. It looks like he might be wearing eye liner but I don't see any eyelid folds. He has the same colour of skin as I do and I'm white, so I assumed he was too. I don't see any other characteristics that would suggest he was from East Asia. Give me some more pro tips, please.

And yes, I know how East Asian people look. My university has many Chinese students so I see Chinese people every day. Plus, I'm learning Japanese and have consequently met or at least seen many Japanese people. I can't remember seeing any people from those countries (or neighbouring ones) that look like this guy in the box art.

 

[Something Amyss]

Kotaku have had a few 'smoking gun' incidents where they have put their desire to stir up controversy above all else, in the case of Laura Dale they put it above her desire not to gain profile by publishing her name and the gripes she had talked about without consulting her first. They turned her into a very public victim, something she did not wish to be.

You haven't described a different MO from the rest of the industry.

No, there's isn't a mathematical equation that proves he's clearly evil, but the common sense is slapping one in the face with a mackerel. Even with all the sociopathy in games, I can't see how anyone could be confused over this cover unless they've been living under a rock for the past 10 years.

Have you played the GTA series, particularly in the past 10 years?

ask a Japanese person what race an Anime character is, they'll say Asian, while we (mostly) see Caucasians with funny hair.

That has a lot to do with the abstraction of anime characters though. Hell, that's why "funny" hair and coloured hair became such a thing in anime. It's one of the ways to distinguish characters with a very simple, often abstract, character set.

Also, I've looked at your posting history and I'm curious as to what you think separates you from so-called "keyboard warriors." Perhaps you should practice what you preach.

 

[Vault101]

My first thought upon seeing a clearly villainous effeminate man in a pink suit was to go "Another evil gay man? Great."

Straight men can wear pink and be effeminate too! Stupid stereotyping.

Hell, in the 1980s, some of the biggest male sex symbols on TV wore pink in Miami Vice.

Thease things don't exist in a vacuum unfortunately

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Kotaku have had a few 'smoking gun' incidents where they have put their desire to stir up controversy above all else, in the case of Laura Dale they put it above her desire not to gain profile by publishing her name and the gripes she had talked about without consulting her first. They turned her into a very public victim, something she did not wish to be.

You haven't described a different MO from the rest of the industry.

I believe the original post said sites "like Kotaku" - which to me signals that Kotaku is the most archetypical culprit, but not the only one. Essentially saying that it is a problem with the "industry" - and presumably the "industry" under discussion is the games journalism industry (although I doubt that is qualified to be an "industry" in itself).

So, the fact that it's common for sites other than Kotaku to engage in such activities doesn't invalidate the argument, it actually strengthens it. The Escapist is also guilty of it, although arguably to a lesser degree. Basically, games journalism is completely screwed up.

 

[Something Amyss]

And now let's pat ourselves on the back for not being silly SJW'swho ruin everything

It's not a legit impression unless you then make an over the top tirade yourself.

If you've studied the Holocaust at any level that a sixteen-year old would be exposed to in public education, there's a good chance by now that you realize that people will quite often walk themselves to their deaths because the human psyche is a very strange thing, and conditioning somebody into submission does a lot to help.

Define "study." Because I took two history courses in college which covered the time period and I wouldn't have known that from the courses. In fact, it's often portrayed as though Jews were not so much walked to their deaths but rather outright deceived until it was literally too late.

I am absolutely flabbergasted that anyone could look at the dude in the pink suit and think he's white. Like really, do you not know how asian people look? Pro-tip, white people don't have epicanthic folds.

Even zooming in on the image I think it's a hard sell to say he people should pick up on epicanthic folds. It looks like eyeliner, which fits with his styled eyebrows and lip colour.

 

[Something Amyss]

So, the fact that it's common for sites other than Kotaku to engage in such activities doesn't invalidate the argument

Saying "sites like Kotaku" is inane when it's an industry wide phenomena. It makes no sense contextually, especially given the rest of the conversation. Especially since, you know, I was asking what set them apart from the rest of the industry. If the response is, effectively, "they're doing what the rest of the industry is doing," then....

 

[Pseudonym]

So the villain is white (except for the fact that he isn't, apparently) and his victim is not. Where is the racism? The symbolism refers to some touchy subjects in a not so sensitive way, like disrespecting religious symbols and humiliating and hurting other human beings. Thing is, as most people agree, bad guys aren't sensitive and this is clearly showing off a bad guy. In my opinion Ubisoft did a good job showing of a bad guy and his badness. I don't really see anything that I can call racist here. The fact that in a shot one person is white and another isn't doesn't count towards making it racist. I need some more context before I decide that. In this case the relevant context the picture gives is mostly that the 'white' guy is an asshole. It just isn't endorsing racism in any way. It might be insensitive but I just don't see the racism. And even in so far as it is insensitive, that seems like the best way to show off a bad guy to me so I don't think ubisoft did much wrong in this instance.

And don't give me this BS of this being the bad guy not being clear. He is smirking, cruel, humiliates and hurts other people, wears a pink suit, desecrates religious symbols, has bad guy weaponry lying around, (good guys don't use AK-47's, they use M16's) reminds us of Vaas, is overly relaxed etc. If you have any awareness about imagery in western media of bad guys you would have picked up on some of these things and probably on some others that I didn't see. If you want to criticise media and tropes, you should at the very least be able to spot an extremely stereotypical bad guy when you see one.

So I can't really agree with Jim here that ubisoft should have given context. The picture was clear enough of itself and didn't need prose to explain what it was conveying.

 

[Erttheking]

Good old Americans and their racism boogyman that lives in every closet. Nothing more American than assuming every other country creates content with their sensibilities in mind.

....Where the Hell did that come from?

Also, you really shouldn't criticize people for jumping to conclusions based on race by jumping to conclusions based on race. It sends a mixed message. I mean you basically just said "Ubisoft isn't racist you stupid selfish Americans"

Then again, for some reason Americans seems to be an acceptable punching bag online. Can make a fellow a little bitter.

 

[Coruptin]

yeah, i immediately realised that the cover depicted the villain and thought the controversy was kind of dumb, but then i remembered i hated the story in the last game and how racist that was, so i can understand why someone might see the cover as inappropriate

 

[Infernal Lawyer]

It really is sad that it's impossible to bring up sensitive topics having to be explicate on what your stance is.

And sorry Jim, the far cry games are first person, I think it's safe to assume that's not a player character until proven otherwise.

Anyone who hasn't played Far Cry doesn't know that, and it's not uncommon for video game box art to have the main/player character on the front. While there ARE plenty of clues to show that he's probably the bad guy, it's not hard to see where the confusion is coming from.

But yeah, I'll agree that it's really smartest to say "wtf is this" and wait for further info before drawing assumptions.

 

[Serfix]

Ubisoft should have put black african guy on that thorne. I really would like to see reaction on that because I bet there might be so much less talk about racist things. For me racism for me means that you hate someone because the way he is (origin, colour, age etc) for that picture you don't know why that guy is opressing that other person (is it just that he is so powerful and wealthy that he can do something like that? And so on) Of course he just could look down on people who is "below" him and well in that case it some sort of racism but it's not race rasism eventhough he wouldn't be native.

I know there is real racism going on, and I have seen it because I live in Finland and right next to Russian border. There are still additudes against people who are innocent on things that is happening there atm and has happened between Finland and Russia.

But this racist card that has pulled from that cover art is pointless in my opinion.

 

[Jennacide]

I love the "not racist" bit at the end, given the show has a definite Nazi Germany thematic style. (Not that I'm calling Jim a nazi, obviously)

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Saying "sites like Kotaku" is inane when it's an industry wide phenomena. It makes no sense contextually, especially given the rest of the conversation.

Doesn't it? I just thought it was an example of where it was happening, with the qualifier that it also happens elsewhere.

Kotaku seems as good an example as any, as one of the key sites that led "the industry" down this particular rabbit hole of sensationalism. I guess you could argue that the rest of the industry is pretty much "like Kotaku" in that Kotaku is successful, so others followed in their footsteps. It's just an example of an archetype.

Especially since, you know, I was asking what set them apart from the rest of the industry. If the response is, effectively, "they're doing what the rest of the industry is doing," then....

... then a lot of other sites are like Kotaku?

Also, you weren't asking what set Kotaku apart from the rest of the industry. You weren't even asking a question. Your statement was, I quote:

You haven't described a different MO from the rest of the industry.

Where is the question in that?

 

[Xellos14]

I'm kind of disappointed it was changed, personally. I liked the first one more than the newer version, the first one looked like a smug, cocky dick. He looked like a villain, and the way he had the hand on the guy who was holding a grenade and not in the least looking happy about it solidified in my mind that he was supposed to be a villain.

But his personality seems drained a bit in the redesign, smug smirk taken away with a bog standard "I am serious villain; here's my serious face and not racist guys, seriously." expression. Just seems dumb, and ubisoft is as much to blame as the knee-jerk "That's racist!" fools, keeping silent for entirely too long when a simple "He's the villain, and also not even white" press release would have been enough.

 

[Vault101]

not to play opression olympics but they gay thing....

now of coarse we don't KNOW this guy is gay, and we don't know how he will act, we can only speculate based on the previous Far Cry game and his general apearance that he will be larger than life and/or flamboyant, but I digress

weather or not he's "actually" or implied gay is beside the point (unless its outright stated he isn't...to be subversive, but I don't put that much stock in Ubisoft), I may mess up terms here but he is "coded" gay

nobody makes choices like his hair/cloths in a vacum, we all know "visual shorthand" is used to comunicate to the audience "this person is good" and "this person is evil" specifically gay or not they take traits we associate with flamboyant gayness and use them to bring about this sense of "other" to tell us he's bad [i/]ewww look at him, isn't he different? isnt he weird?[/i] and then big ol normal hetero manly man comes in to vanquish the evil gaylord, as I understand the protag isn't white but god....could you only imagine?

 

[Squeaky]

I wonder if we ever reach the point where people look at a box art like FC4's and only see two humans instead of a "white human" and a "slightly darker skinned human".

It be nice to say I'l live to see that day but people just seem incapable of looking past skin colour even when they preach "that's racist" they don't look at the hole picture just the surface.