If the guy on the cover wasn't meant to be white they screwed that up, he looks whiter than me and I'm as honky as it gets. My first thought upon seeing a clearly villainous effeminate man in a pink suit was to go "Another evil gay man? Great."
No natural predators, what about them cave lions!? I liked the rest of your comment though.Neferius said:All human beings are born with an ingrained predisposition towards hatred and discrimination based on meaningless and inconsequential details.
It is an evolutionary consequence of having no natural predators except ourselves, and for having developed for thousands of years within limited and heavily inbred communities also known as "tribes".
Getting along as a diverse cosmopolitan society is what actually requires conditioning and education.
Yes, you read that right, babies are born racist. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/racist-babies-nine-month-olds-bias-faces_n_1477937.html]
bottom-line is: being Evil is Easy.
You must be newly exposed to the mouthbreathing shitstorm churning hivemind of SJW's. Welcome to the internet.AlwaysPractical said:Who the fuck thought that guy was the player character? Are you just plain high?
Even that won't save them. If they don't attach a PDF with a story recap to their screenshot, as well as a huge fucking red arrow over the guy's face disclaiming that "NOT THE PLAYER. BAD GUY. PLEASE PLEASE CAN WE KEEP THE COVER, WE LIKE IT, OR IS IT TOO INSENSITIVE?", then apparently they failed to provide "context". I feel sorry for them a little bit.grimner said:I get that, I truly do, and people with some common sense and who have at least played a single assassin's creed game will know just from the disclaimer of the game the lenghts to which Ubisoft is willing to bend over backwards and stifle any ontions of political incorrectness.
I think it's already been said, but I'm sure Ubisoft kept quiet to get some buzz going, since all they had to show was a cover and a pre-order deal. Whether this worked out to their advantage is another matter.grimner said:I get that, I truly do, and people with some common sense and who have at least played a single assassin's creed game will know just from the disclaimer of the game the lenghts to which Ubisoft is willing to bend over backwards and stifle any ontions of political incorrectness.
That said, and I believe those are the points of contention here, their response to the controversy was tardy enough to give the speculation time to run amok. That Ubisoft delayed commenting even with a curt tweet certainly did not help.
That far Cry's previous iterations also dabbled on the subject walking a tight rope also doesn't help.
To me it's not about whether or not this cover is racist (and frankly, being european, I am seeing bad enough signs of real racism to actually be arguing this to take my mind of politics), but whether Ubi could have maintained a moral highground by simply saying "For fuck sake, the dude's the villain, and he's an asian with really, really tacky hair" sooner than they did.
Well, no. Because when you take something extremely obvious the wrong way, then you are either fucking retarded (not an uncommon thing among SJW's) or you're misrepresenting it on purpose. Even if you ask for context, the thing is that a dev/publisher does not owe it to you. They owe you nothing. They will present and advertise their game by slowly releasing information about it over time, because that's what keeps people thinking about it and that works. If you brew a shitstorm when you lack information, contrary to what Jim claims in the video, no, it is not their fault for not providing it. It's your fault for brewing a shitstorm when you... you know... lack information. A bit too obvious? Yes, one would think.Casual Shinji said:The thing is, does a developer/publisher need to come out with a statement everytime something extremely obvious is taken the wrong way?
I agree.Ronack said:I'd rather say Ubisoft is the victim in all of this, because stupid people are becoming a lot louder. Instead of just addressing the fact that they didn't add a framing device, they immediately steamrolled the company with bullshit, hatred and social justice warrioring. Does Ubisoft hold blame for what happened? Sure. All of it? No. Most of it? No. Half of it? No. A quarter? Eeeeeh, sure. We live in a world where the idiot masses are becoming increasingly vocal, and we can't expect everyone, or companies, to take in to account just how stupid people can get.