SkepticalHat said:
The reason, at least personally, for why people think that this discussion would lead to a "progressive checklist" is because most of the discussion about this is negative.
On that, we can agree(ish). If I have criticisms for what I loath to call my 'side' in this debate (and I do), it's that we do a lot of preaching to the choir, and not enough trying to start an open and constructive discourse with those who are less convinced, or just less sure of our intent.
Of course, I can also sympathise with people who feel that trying to do so in an environment such as these spaces have become is next to impossible.
Very few articles/videos/blog posts about representation in video games uses a positive perspective. For the most part when someone talks about representation in video games it's all about how this or that is bad. That you should feel bad for enjoying it, and it should be removed completely.
I think. when someone says something in gaming is 'bad', no matter who it is saying it, then it should be taken as no more than exactly what it is, that one person's subjective opinion. Certainly, not as any kind of threat to those games, especially if the person in question is just a pundit who doesn't actually have any power to change anything on their own. They are entitled to their opinion, and you are entitled to disagree. That much can be left at that.
as for "... and you should feel bad", I agree that is a more serious matter. However, I also can't think of many instances where I've heard that explicitly said. Admittedly, I don't watch every single video or read every blog post around the subject. However, I do believe a lot of people in this debate go looking to take criticisms of things they enjoy personally, when that's not actually the intention of the critic.
I mean, I personally find the portrayal of female body image in Dead or Alive, Soul Calibre etc. ridiculous, but that doesn't mean I'm calling anyone who disagrees with me a pervert. Again, it all comes down to how, for all the people I've heard say "I don't like X" or "I think an over-abundance of X to the detriment of Y is exclusionary", I've never heard anyone make the leap to "X should be BANNED". At least, not from anyone who anyone else should be taking seriously.
hentropy said:
Of course no one is arguing directly for "checklists" using that terminology. I think there is a lot more common ground on this issue than people will admit. There aren't very many people who want to purge all women from games or close off games from being inclusive. I've argued over and over that more inclusion is, if nothing else, a good business move.
But to illustrate the point, let's take Gone Home. I didn't think it was a horrible game, but I can't say I'm eager to play it again. It's an interactive story, I'm familiar with such things due to visual novels. But of course, it's most known for tackling issues regarding homosexuality. That is a part of it which got a lot of attention from the gaming press. It won awards. The fact is that it wasn't much of an actual game, just a visual novel only has some game-like qualities due to the interactivity. I probably won't be playing it again in another year or two. I'm not everyone, of course.
Still, it seems like it wouldn't have got quite as much attention without the homosexual themes. It's impossible to know for sure, that much I admit to.
While I can't actually comment on the quality of Gone Home or it's legitimacy as a game (because I've never played it), I do think it raises a point about the function of the gaming press in the current environment.
Big games, such as franchised releases by large publishers, don't really
need the gaming press. The audience of their own marketing is already much larger than publication like The Escapist, or Kotaku, Destructoid or even IGN. Nobody who comes here needs to be told that there's a new Call of Duty or FIFA out this year, because of course there is. Beyond even that, I doubt anybody needed to be told that Destiny was a solid, good-looking shooter that's a bit derivative and up itself, because between the game's own marketing and the fact that it's made by Bungie, we all could have surmised as much. It's games make by people who can't afford to do their own marketing, that really rely on good reviews to get themselves out there.
Now, whether or not this is a healthy balance for the games industry and the gaming press to be in is a whole other discussion in and of itself. However, I'm just explaining why I don't really mind how much attention smaller, fringe games are getting from the press at the moment.
Ultimately, game journalists are still gamers, and I firmly believe the primary concern of any gamer when playing any game is "Am I enjoying this?". If they're not, then no amount of progressive themes is going to help the game's case. It's just a big bonus to some people if the game in question happens to strike a chord with the person playing it. I mean, it's not like there aren't also less conventional games that
don't market themselves as being particularly progressive that become press darlings. For example, apart from QTE sequences (which many would label as gameplay only begrudgingly at best), how much conventional 'gameplay' does TellTale's The Walking Dead have? Not very much, in my opinion. You walk around, select conversation options, and every so often pick up specific objects to use in scripted actions. Not exactly epic, expansive, edge of the seat stuff.
The Walking Dead earned it's place as a critical darling not through pushing a line of having strong, complex, and diverse characters (although it does have them). It earned it's place because people enjoyed playing it, pure and simple. A lot of us want to see more diversity in gaming. So, when a game comes along that offers just that, that can't help but be in the game's favour; not because we feel it's necessary to support are agenda, but just because it's something we have an appetite for. However, if the game it's attached to isn't very engaging (such being entirely up to the personal tastes of the person playing it), then just ebing progressive won't magically turn it into a good game in the eyes of most people.
