Should Diversity be an Obligation in Game Design?

[McMarbles]

I'm with everyone else in saying it should not be an obligation. On the other hand, I am a bit bothered when I hear about devs being told they HAVE to make their characters a certain gender and race (essentially white male) for the sake of sales.

Anything that meddles in a developer's creative vision is an issue for me.

This is exactly why I get annoyed when "But it will interfere in the creator's sacrosanct vision!" used as an excuse whenever someone suggests, maybe, possibly, gaming protagonists should have some diversity wider than "Grizzled burly white man with stubble and crew cut" vs. "Grizzled burly white man with stubble and slightly longer hair".

We can't compromise the creator's vision? The creator's vision has already been compromised. We have an abundance of GBWM's not because of some bold vision on the part of creators, but because marketing execs have concluded that's what sells to the target audience of late teen/twentysomething white males.

 

[Dizchu]

Now I see that pretty much everyone here thinks diversity should not be an obligation (as I do).
Some have even hinted that maybe it was a loaded question, of course forcing diversity is a bad thing, who'd think otherwise?

But let me play around with this a bit.

You could say that there is some sort of responsibility on behalf of content creators to represent people in a fair way. ESPECIALLY in games with large casts of characters or with customisable characters. In the latter case, I think diversity is an obligation. If you played a modern RPG and couldn't create a non-white/non-male character, that'd be kinda shitty. We've also experienced the Tomadachi Life controversy, and I actually think that Nintendo should have allowed gay couples.

However, for narrative-driven games focussed on specific protagonists that the developers have written... its their artistic vision. Straight, white male characters shouldn't get the reaction of "oh boy, not again". Rather, it should be "let's see if there's anything to this character's... well, character". If they're written as just another dime-a-dozen mandude/blokefella then that indicates poor writing rather than a saturation of characters of a certain demographic.

I'm loving some of the discussion that's going on, though.

 

[Kathinka]

Ehhh. Not sure. In some games it doesn't fit (female soldiers in most shooters? Kinda out of place. In most historic settings downright implausible), and if a very character-centered game has a very fleshed out main character with rich back story, it can be sort of tough to write two versions, a male and a female. Imagine the nameless from Planescape:Torment as a girl. Yeah, no. You wouldn't expect book authors or movie makers to produce two versions of their product (or several more even) with varying characters. Sure, it's nice if a game has it, but there's much, MUCH more important problems with modern games that we should deal with first.

 

[Pete Oddly]

However, for narrative-driven games focussed on specific protagonists that the developers have written... its their artistic vision. Straight, white male characters shouldn't get the reaction of "oh boy, not again". Rather, it should be "let's see if there's anything to this character's... well, character". If they're written as just another dime-a-dozen mandude/blokefella then that indicates poor writing rather than a saturation of characters of a certain demographic.

I'm loving some of the discussion that's going on, though.

I find the problem here is one of translation between the gamers themselves and the guys at the top of the industry signing everybody's cheques. I think most of us can agree that the whining, flailing antics of prejudiced douchebags can be attributed mostly to young, immature boys (and some girls, I guess, but mostly boys) who are full of teenaged angst and trolljuice, and that they are simply a very vitriolic and vocal minority in the gaming community as a whole. I will not diminish the damage they cause to the community on the ground floor, but they really don't do much to affect what games get made in the AAA market (aside from buying them, obviously).

Most of us would play a game no matter what character was in the lead, as long as it's good. Hell, I personally prefer when I'm playing as a character who in no way represents me, because it allows me to experience things through the lens of someone else's perspective. That is, of course, if the characters are written well. However; the suits have this view of the AAA industry where it's hard for them to see what is really wanted in games or what works. They look at charts and think, oh this did well, so let's make more of this, making developers fight tooth and nail if they want to create anything different.

It also doesn't help that, at least in the western market, a good number of these suits are straight white men, and while they may not be prejudiced (or they may, who knows?), they have been living in a business world other old white money helped create, and so imagining a games industry that doesn't solely make bucks off the backs of straight white male protagonists is hard for them.

That last bit is mostly speculation, though, as I don't know any of these guys personally, nor have I looked into them to any degree. Maybe they're bigots, maybe they're just playing the age-old game of follow the money, or maybe they have been conditioned by their environment to simply subconsciously dismiss the idea of diversity in games.

Luckily, in the end, this is a diminishing trend. Hell, one of the most popular games of this year was The Walking Dead and in that you play as an 11-year-old girl who is half black and half Asian. Eventually we'll see a game market with a vast variety of flavours of protagonists to choose from, and we'll see games which deal almost exclusively with the social issues faced by certain people, and we'll still have the Mighty Whitey Killfest games we've come to associate with the AAA industry.

This is, of course, barring some shitstorm surpassing that of GG levels which rocks the boat too far in one direction or another, causing the whole damn thing to flip over and sink, heh.

 

[Pete Oddly]

Ehhh. Not sure. In some games it doesn't fit (female soldiers in most shooters? Kinda out of place. In most historic settings downright implausible), and if a very character-centered game has a very fleshed out main character with rich back story, it can be sort of tough to write two versions, a male and a female. Imagine the nameless from Planescape:Torment as a girl. Yeah, no. You wouldn't expect book authors or movie makers to produce two versions of their product (or several more even) with varying characters. Sure, it's nice if a game has it, but there's much, MUCH more important problems with modern games that we should deal with first.

Considering this climate of overpriced DLC, pre-order frenzies, microtransactions and release-bugfest-patch-repeat cycles, I'm inclined to agree with you on that last bit.

 

[NeutralStasis]

I know I am late to the party, but I believe that video games are a type of art. I also am under the impression that courts in the US also determined that video games are a type of art and are therefore protected in some ways due to the classification. That being said, I feel that game developers should be free to create whatever content they wish. I also feel that people should feel free to buy whatever content they wish. I know the vote with your wallet thing is kind of overdone, but there are and will be more developers that is going to target non-white, straight, male gamers. This change of paradigm will take time, but will happen. And that is a good thing too. I look forward to seeing these games come out and plan on enjoying playing them. I like the idea of stepping outside of my comfort zone and this will be a new way to do so.

I also think that the demands being placed on developers by those that would call them racist or misogynistic is a little over the top as well. There is a difference in saying that there is a market for games that are more inclusive to their audience then saying your are a racist/misogynistic fool for making that game that does not fit my world view. I have seen some of both, the the latter seem to talk louder and louder as time goes on. In the past few years, people have built their careers on the latter, and while I am confident that some of what they say is needed, they are indeed getting paid to do this now. Money changes things...and typically not for the better.

 

[Wonder Warrior]

Personally I believe that one reason we should encourage and promote diversity is because their is so much diversity in real life. If the media were accurate with it's depiction of the world then the population would be 85% white male. So perhaps if games were accurately skewed towards one group it would be South and East Asian women who make up the worlds largest recorded human demographic besides children. Although if we wanted to get into specifics then game makers would make all their characters as digestible as possible. Maybe we need to stop mass producing games and start making games based on creative ideas and characters with personalities we may not like.

 

[Xan Krieger]

No, developers can if they want to but you can't just place these kind of obligations on art. There'll be different games for different people, it's all up to the developers.

 

[omega 616]

No 'cos then you end up with token characters, "well, we need a black guy, a girl, an ethic and a trans... just make the most generic ones and give them 3 seconds of cinematic time and bobs your uncle".

The industry just needs a bigger emphases on it. We don't need every game to have a diverse character.... just 90% less brown haired ?traight guys with stubble and witty one liners.

It's like all game devs got together and decided on one protagonist just to cut back on the work load. From lone survivor to mgs to uncharted to gears of war ... Jesus, make a blonde stubbly white guy with witty one liners! Change something.

(I know games do this ... devil may cry for example, but seriously tomb raider etc are ok but they are in the minority)

 

[Zhukov]

Second of all, Bioshock infinite's furor was rather small, but it was there.

If it was there, I didn't see it. I certainly don't remember it detracting from the respectable sales and plentiful critical praise being heaped upon that game. I think we can safely say they got away with it.

Third, you just listed a group of character's who were well written and notice how none of those character's were protagonists.

Actually, I just listed the first non-white, non-straght, non-male characters with obvious negative traits that I could think of. I can't help having excellent taste.

None of them are protagonists because video game protagonists with negative traits are few and far between. Add the qualifier of being non-male etc etc and I can't think of a single one.

If the character's a well written one, I hope that the perpetually offended either ignore them or get shouted down by normal people. But if the character isn't well written, then they assume it's from hatred rather than not having the budget or time to hire a writer. I was referring to protagonist's and I'm kicking myself for not including that in my original post.

So... poorly written characters receive criticism, some of it inevitably dumb criticism, while well written ones don't?

Isn't that how it should work?

Does that answer you're question?

No.

You specifically did not answer my question.

 

[Silence]

Fuck no. Developers should make what they wanr.

But I won't buy or play a game (most of the time, if it has no redeeming factors, like a really good story) if you only can play as a bland brown-haired male. Not even on sale. Like most "AAA"-Games.

There are so many, really diverse, options in videogaming. I don't even need to play as male 90% of the time in the games I play.

 

[Vault101]

The topic isn't about criticisms and analysis. We are talking about obligation. They have two different kinds of consequences, and the later limits any medium.

which is a complete and utter fiction trotted out by reactionary's

 

[blackrave]

No. No obligations.
On the other hand ignoring anything that is not like yourself is ridiculous.

I personally use dice to determine things about character that aren't absolutely relevant to story.
When introducing new character I throw dice several times to determine the look (gender, skin, hair, eyes, etc.)
Later- things like religion, political leanings, intolerances, etc.
Of course not all at once, but whenever it is needed to be revealed.
But if I can't write some character I may change certain aspects into something I can write better

Spoiler: Sometimes it leads to funny thing

Like crew of spaceship "BackBreaker"
Crew is black- mostly africans, with few african descendants in between
Captain?
Whitest despot you've ever seen.

I wonder if "It happened randomly", could be used to deflect racism accusations or not?

I'm thinking about making program that randomly applies values to certain things though...

 

[CaitSeith]

The topic isn't about criticisms and analysis. We are talking about obligation. They have two different kinds of consequences, and the later limits any medium.

which is a complete and utter fiction trotted out by reactionary's

Any proof of that?

 

[Vault101]

]Any proof of that?

[I/]are you EFFING kid-[/I]

ok ok


is there an actual authority or body that has the ability to stop a game from existing because it doesn't meet a "progressiveness" quota? has ANYONE suggested doing the equivalent of adding women to something like Shawshank in the name of inclusiveness? either officially or on the internets?

and would it be any worse than the current market conditions that promote blandness over creativity? I mean for fuck sake this argument always goes back to defending the "artistic integrity" of an industry that's [b/]effectively artistically bankrupt 99% of the fucking time anyway[/b] and I'm mean worse than Hollywood

and hollywoods pretty effing bad

gamers are wrapped up in their own god damn bubble they think the the Femenazi and SJW comitees are coming, [I/]that's not how any of this works[/I] they want their games to play alongside the big boys of film/TV/books/whatever but don't want to accept what that actually means

and what that actually means is [I/]thinking[/I] about this shit we consume and create

 

[Michael Kerig]

Best solution would probably be to make the characters in the game reflective of the diversity represented in the setting.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

Of course Diversity shouldn't be an obligation. Doesn't mean people aren't going to pipe down and accept that there'll be damn near no diversity in games.

The thing is, it seems like the gaming industry is obligated to have straight white men in the vast majority of games.
People fear the dreaded checklist, but there's already one. Straight? White? Male? I mean look at the vast majority of playable characters in videogames. Especially in most of the well known stuff.

There shouldn't be obligations in the gaming industry at all as far as creativity goes, but that's just not the case.

 

[CaitSeith]

]Any proof of that?

[I/]are you EFFING kid-[/I]

ok ok


is there an actual authority or body that has the ability to stop a game from existing because it doesn't meet a "progressiveness" quota? has ANYONE suggested doing the equivalent of adding women to something like Shawshank in the name of inclusiveness? either officially or on the internets?

and would it be any worse than the current market conditions that promote blandness over creativity? I mean for fuck sake this argument always goes back to defending the "artistic integrity" of an industry that's [b/]effectively artistically bankrupt 99% of the fucking time anyway[/b] and I'm mean worse than Hollywood

and hollywoods pretty effing bad

gamers are wrapped up in their own god damn bubble they think the the Femenazi and SJW comitees are coming, [I/]that's not how any of this works[/I] they want their games to play alongside the big boys of film/TV/books/whatever but don't want to accept what that actually means

and what that actually means is [I/]thinking[/I] about this shit we consume and create

Good point. However I was talking about obligation in a more general sense, like in this example: for a while game publishers imposed to the developers the obligation of including multiplayer mode in their games. In cases where the game was going to be single-player only, it limited the resources and time for the teams to make the original experience they intended, just to shoehorn the multiplayer feature required by the publishers. This resulted in inferior games in both modes.

Obviously publishers would need to got thru a major lobotomy (or a major change in their audience) before even thinking in imposing an obligation of diversity the same way they did with multiplayer mode. But that's not my point. My point is about how obligation can limit artistic media (while criticism usually doesn't)

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

I think forcing the devs to add anything into their games is a bad idea. Forcing things in when the creators don't intend it to be there tends to do everyone a disservice.

 

[oZode]

There is no obligation on the part of game developers to make games that are diverse in terms of ethnic, sexuality, gender, hair style, eye color, religion, personality disorder and so on. However it is often recommended to make characters easier to distinguish, too many people who look the same is just confusing to the audience after all.