|
Post by bakudon on Jun 24, 2015 14:19:47 GMT -5
In general, I believe that creative content in any media, AAA or otherwise, should not be dictated by the need to satisfy pressure groups of any kind: people wanting women, LGBT or whatever protagonists – or the need to satisfy people wanting a white male male protagnoist, for that matter. That’s freedom of expression for you. I would dread a world where media is imposed by overt or covert pressure to conform to some standard of political correctness.
That said, I’m not trying to claim that AAA game studios are forerunners of freedom in expression or artisic merit. Fact of the matter is that games are not created by a committee operating across the whole industry, doling out protagonists in a fair and balanced manner. And even if there where, what would such a manner be? Should a game designer look around and decide that ”okay, n percent of games released this year have had straight male protagonists, so I can’t do that then”?
That said, you are also talking about AAA games, which are games made with the largest common denominator, intended to apply to a widest audience possible. Games are also the product of the society that creates them. Excluding Japan, last I checked most AAA games are produced in countries with a predominantly white population, and the majority of the intended audience is white as well, at least if you weigh for purchasing power. LGBT people are a clear minority as well. Thus, when squeezing out the largest common denominator, you tend to end up with that white guy, especially given how the Japanese are not too obsessed with wanting Japanese-looking protagonists. So, long story short, marketing decided it should be the norm by the numbers because it really is the norm for the subgroup of humanity involved in games business. I can’t really consider that ”broken”.
Of course, this will not produce best possible games or most varied entertainment. If anything, I dislike AAA games because of the solidification of certain gameplay tropes, though not for socio-political reasons as you do. Unfortunately, I must admit that the making of AAA games costs so much that marketing concerns cannot be disregarded. The answer, then, is to play games you like and not those you don’t. Convince producers that there is a market for the stuff you want. Make your own. Find something you like in Kickstarter and fund it. As in all things, avoid becoming bitter or hateful because some aspect of the world doesn’t function as you’d like it to.
By your reference to power structures (which would be so complicated that I’ll leave it out of the scope of this discussion), I get the feeling that our differences of opinion relate to a more general divide between the political left and right, where the left has traditionally stressed the importance of role models, wanting art to provide role models of an idealised world. I feel this line of thought working here. Me, I don’t think that any media ought to be required to portray anything or anyone, though I welcome anyone making an individual work of art portraying whatever to do so, provided he can get funding.
|
|
|
Post by bakudon on Jun 24, 2015 14:26:53 GMT -5
Power structures are about who make the laws. That’s not completely true. There’s plenty of covert power to go around in society. Control of the media, for instance, gives you many opportunities to propagate your message and indirectly impose your will on others, so to say. On a give society, this control may or may not lie with the lawmakers (though the more totalitarian a regime is, the more likely the former case would be).
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Joestar on Jun 24, 2015 14:33:38 GMT -5
There definitely needs to be better diversification in games - I just wish that people weren't so fucking gung-ho about it to the point that they're ignoring or trying to shit on games solely because a game doesn't pass the Bulldyke Test, or whatever other complaint they have. Mostly I just hate seeing the clickbait articles that are less about forming a factual argument and more about getting people incensed on twitter, like anything on Polygon, or on the other end of the spectrum, stuff written by that Milo guy. They should have just let you pick Jensen's skin color like you could JC's in the original game! It's a bit of a copout, but that was something I always thought was interesting about the original game. I was going to say, it's so stupid that they don't let you. Even in Deus Ex 2 which had a messed up budget and super fractured production you could choose skin color and also be male or female. Like in a game where they already have female character models and Jensen has so little voiced dialogue anyway it would have been relatively easy to implement. I mean, it was accomplished in Invisible War so the bar isn't high. This lack of customization is something that frustrates me more than a lack of developed character representation. So many VG protagonists have only minimal dialogue, or you barely see them because the game is first person/you're wearing armor/whatever. But a lot of them won't give you any customization. But then in RPGs you get stupid levels of it. Other games love to have "RPG elements" like upgrade trees and stuff so that they don't have the stigma of being "just a dumb action game" but the customization is often absent. I didn't really see him as a white guy, more of an "ethnically ambiguous whitish guy" - he has dark hair, olive skin, angular vaguely non-white features. That being said I totally agree, they should've given people the option to change his skin color like in the others, there was no reason not to. That’s not completely true. There’s plenty of covert power to go around in society. Control of the media, for instance, gives you many opportunities to propagate your message and indirectly impose your will on others, so to say. On a give society, this control may or may not lie with the lawmakers (though the more totalitarian a regime is, the more likely the former case would be). The point is, and I'm not for things like quotas or anything like that, that Western society (especially the US) is at a point where if you do not "get with the program" so to speak, you will be protested, people will demand you be fired from your job, they will harass your family if they can find your personal information, you will be hacked, doxed, or DDoSed by 4chan/anon, etc. And "the program" right now is upsetting the social order (this is why I brought up "power structures"). On that note TERFs can rot in hell can rot in hell for what they do to trans women, which is terrorism. Hypocritical cunts.
|
|
|
Post by Allie on Jun 24, 2015 14:35:58 GMT -5
Power structures are about who make the laws. That’s not completely true. There’s plenty of covert power to go around in society. Control of the media, for instance, gives you many opportunities to propagate your message and indirectly impose your will on others, so to say. On a give society, this control may or may not lie with the lawmakers (though the more totalitarian a regime is, the more likely the former case would be). The point is, and I'm not for things like quotas or anything like that, that Western society (especially the US) is at a point where if you do not "get with the program" so to speak, you will be protested, people will demand you be fired from your job, they will harass your family if they can find your personal information, you will be hacked, doxed, or DDoSed by 4chan/anon, etc. And "the program" right now is upsetting the social order (this is why I brought up "power structures").
|
|
|
Post by bakudon on Jun 24, 2015 14:44:02 GMT -5
Yeah, well I agree on that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2015 14:54:07 GMT -5
So the mention of "mechanical apartheid" in the E3 brief for the new Deus Ex rustled some jimmies. Discuss. As for me, given that real-life cybernetics are usually used to help people with severe morphological defects, grievous injuries or certain other medical conditions (i.e. poor vision), I'm mildly puzzled that they're going with the "RACISM" route instead of "disability discrimination" route, even if it'd be hard to call Jensen "disabled" when he can easily handle a 5-story fall and punch someone out through a wall. Even if he didn't ask for this. Granted, said racism route makes some sense in-story, but... The fact that the star of the series is a brooding white man who constantly whines that he didn't want cool robot parts is where a lot of the complaints are coming from, and I agree significantly. Not completely, it does make sense in the story presented with the series, but in the context of its white bread heroes, it comes off accidentally as "WHAT IF WHITE PEOPLE WERE MINORITY AHHHHHHHHHHHHH" which always the stupidest fucking thing. This is one of those things that probably won't be nearly as bad once the game is released, though, since the augmented are pretty diverse bunch in the last game. Point taken. On that note, my favorite antagonist from Human Revolution was the creepy semi-nudist Israeli cybercommando guy. EDIT: Oh holy Hell this thread grew while I wasn't watching. Wow!
|
|
|
Post by GamerL on Jun 24, 2015 17:48:47 GMT -5
My problem with the situation gaming finds itself in currently is well, think back to the days of Grand Theft Auto's peak controversy when you had moral crusaders like Jack Thompson hell bent on getting those games censored, didn't every gamer scoff at the idea of developers being forced to bow to societal pressure and self censor their games?
Now ten years later what do we have many gamers saying? "yes, developers, please kowtow to societal pressure and make the kind of game I want you to make or else I'll whine about it on Twitter, don't make the kind of game you want to make, more self censorship please!".
That is a very bizarre turn of events that I never expected to happen, it's not that I don't want there to be more protagonists in games beyond "generic white dude", but I'm not sure acting like Jack Thompson in lipstick and hoop earrings is the right way to go about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2015 17:54:40 GMT -5
My main problem with how American-centric the debate is. You hear tons about tensions obviously relating back to America's Civil War history, but not as much about (for example) Ireland and Scotland's rather rocky relations with Britain.
Also, IIRC there were some people who said that there was no such thing as Polish mythology (but there WAS Norse and Greek mythology) shortly before or after Witcher 3 was released. Seriously? SERIOUSLY
|
|
|
Post by Joseph Joestar on Jun 24, 2015 18:02:52 GMT -5
My main problem with how American-centric the debate is. You hear tons about tensions obviously relating back to America's Civil War history, but not as much about (for example) Ireland and Scotland's rather rocky relations with Britain. And then IIRC there were some people who said that there was no such thing as Polish mythology shortly before or after Witcher 3 was released. Seriously? SERIOUSLY?Sadly I think that's a product of the whole America thing, we kind of act like the world revolves around us and shut out stuff like that. I mean, the world does revolve around us and we're totally great aside from like our government and our healthcare and gun control and our fucked up police, but we should be appreciating other peoples' situations as well . As for the Polish mythology deal, I think that was in that stupid Polygon article. Oh, my bad, I need to be more specific, there's so many of them - the stupid one about how Witcher 3 is evil because it's not diverse enough.
|
|
|
Post by JDarkside on Jun 24, 2015 18:05:11 GMT -5
My problem with the situation gaming finds itself in currently is well, think back to the days of Grand Theft Auto's peak controversy when you had moral crusaders like Jack Thompson hell bent on getting those games censored, didn't every gamer scoff at the idea of developers being forced to bow to societal pressure and self censor their games? Now ten years later what do we have many gamers saying? "yes, developers, please kowtow to societal pressure and make the kind of game I want you to make or else I'll whine about it on Twitter, don't make the kind of game you want to make, more self censorship please!". That is a very bizarre turn of events that I never expected to happen, it's not that I don't want there to be more protagonists in games beyond "generic white dude", but I'm not sure acting like Jack Thompson in lipstick and hoop earrings is the right way to go about it. Oh, that change is completely easy to understand. The audience has grown more diverse as gaming has become a more popular medium, and there's no longer a big, grand enemy trying to kill this new and growing art form. Gaming has become a cultural institution, so we no longer have to defend ourselves and our merit as a medium or art form. Now that we've started growing, we're in a transition phase where the medium is starting to move to represent more viewpoints and we're seeing more experiments that redefine what many see games as. We also have people going super defensive over this now, because they feel that gaming changing to allow more people erases their space and identity, even though that's not the case at all, so the medium is being dragged into maturity, kicking and screaming. Most every medium had this sort of moment, and it will pass for the better eventually. TL;DR: Gaming base is no longer so white in the west, developers and publishers are still in that mindset and many are trying to figure out how to change with the times, while others are trying to turn back the clock and it will eventually stop. Eventually. Someday. Oh, and Japan is just trying to figure out what they even are anymore, but that's a different topic altogether.
|
|
|
Post by 16bitter on Jun 24, 2015 18:57:00 GMT -5
Now that we've started growing, we're in a transition phase where the medium is starting to move to represent more viewpoints and we're seeing more experiments that redefine what many see games as. We also have people going super defensive over this now, because they feel that gaming changing to allow more people erases their space and identity, even though that's not the case at all, so the medium is being dragged into maturity, kicking and screaming. Most every medium had this sort of moment, and it will pass for the better eventually. I hope you're not referring to the wave of decadence that completely destroyed Western art music to pave the way for John Cage's "experimental" non-music and destroyed Romantic painting by allowing room for the Cubist/Avant-Garde abortions? Nothing passed for the better in those mediums. Either way, I find this notion of "representation" offensive. Just because a trans-gendered bisexual Indian woman may not be able to entirely relate to the proverbial "average white male" in real life, they should be able to, if they're not overwhelmed by prejudice, to relate to them IN ART. The whole power of art is in abstraction: you're not empathizing with the way a character looks, their cultural heritage, or the specific circumstances of the plot; you're empathizing with their ideas and emotions, things that typically transcend cultural boundaries. Something like Homer's Odyssey doesn't have lasting power because all of its readers are straight male Greek heroes and can relate to the protagonist; they relate to an honorable person separated from their home and love in the name of duty overcoming insurmountable odds to return. Something like Rand's Fountainhead doesn't have lasting power because all of its readers are straight white architectural students; readers relate to the protagonist's struggle for individuality and pursuit of their passions in the wake of constant opposition. I've never once had qualms with playing the role of a female character in anything from Tomb Raider, Arcana Heart, Embodiment of Scarlet Devil, Portal 2, Timesplitters etc. because that's who the developers chose to let me control and the games were fun. When more minorities are involved in the gaming industry, you'll naturally see them create more characters inspired by themselves and their heroes. And I for one will be just fine with that as long as the games are great. But the idea that someone could hold a grudge against a great game because they, yet again, have to play as a straight white male, especially a heroic, charismatic one, is absurd to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2015 19:36:47 GMT -5
ight white architectural students; readers relate to the protagonist's struggle for individuality and pursuit of their passions in the wake of constant opposition. I've never once had qualms with playing the role of a female character in anything from Tomb Raider, Arcana Heart, Embodiment of Scarlet Devil, Portal 2, Timesplitters etc. because that's who the developers chose to let me control and the games were fun. When more minorities are involved in the gaming industry, you'll naturally see them create more characters inspired by themselves and their heroes. And I for one will be just fine with that as long as the games are great. But the idea that someone could hold a grudge against a great game because they, yet again, have to play as a straight white male, especially a heroic, charismatic one, is absurd to me. Yes, but are you a straight white male? If so, your perspective is skewed by the very nature of being a member of the majority. I understand and agree with what you're saying to a point, but it's a fallacy to think that just because YOU personally do not have a problem with something, no one else SHOULD have a problem with it.
|
|
|
Post by JDarkside on Jun 24, 2015 19:55:01 GMT -5
That is some old bullshit right there.
First off, the argument is not that a game is bad because it has you playing as a straight white dude. The argument is if the game's narrative doesn't make that identity central to the character, then there should be the option to choose the little details like race and orientation.
Second, representation is important among so many put down groups because it reminds them that, hey, you're human too, and you matter. The problem is not that a single game has a straight, white guy lead, it's that nearly every game is like that. That's not diversity, that's playing to a trend and making it the norm, marketing solely to a particular demographic (which is almost always the case with big budget gaming). Girls exist, trans people exist, gay people exist, black people exist (and aren't stereotypes based entirely on rap songs and black comedic sidekick characters the writers saw). They should exist in this artform more than they do (trans people practically don't exist at all in gaming outside the indie scene, unless it's yet another "LOL MAN WEARING DRESS" joke).
Honestly, just the existence of bisexual characters helped me realize my own identity. I seriously did not know bisexuality was a thing beyond some vague abstract of a sexual predator for nearly my entire life because of what I learned from media and my own family's cultural prejudices. It wasn't until I started looking and reading at works with gay or bisexual characters that I started to understand the feelings in me more. Hero by Perry Moore taught me that it's okay to love someone, no matter what others think, or what their sex or gender is, for example. It's a beautiful little novel about superheroes and accepting yourself, whether your gay, of another race, sickly, or have a colonoscopy bag stuck to your chest for the rest of your life.
That book literally changed my life. It was art, and it was art because it allowed itself to show all sorts of different people beyond straight white dude. It could tackle subjects IMPOSSIBLE with a straight white dude. Being alienated for your sexual orientation, seeing the violent result of racism, dealing with your own sense of worth as a person when you've been someone nobody can categorize. It was a beautiful thing. The author of the book was gay, but he was not Asian, not sickly, and did not have a colonoscopy bag. He chose to write about other characters different than him because, wow, he was a human being with empathy! And it was all better for it!
What you're arguing is that gaming should be staying still exactly where it is, simply because you shoose to dislike what you don't even bother to understand. Not liking how some people overreact to non-controversies is one thing, asking the entire medium stay the way it is just boggles the mind. No medium got better by staying still. The experiments that didn't work disappeared with time or inspired more interesting movements, and the ones that worked off the bat catch on (which we're starting to see with fantasy WRPGs adding in homosexual characters in the main cast). Games aren't turning to ash, there's more gay characters out there now, and the games are still of the same quality they'd be if those characters weren't gay.
...and I just noticed you referenced Ayn Rand as a positive example of art transcending lack of racial diversity and that explains so much about your post.
Thirdly, you got a problem with cubism, son?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2015 19:58:20 GMT -5
I think he was saying that Ayn Rand's Fountainhead just wasn't as relatable due to having a niche audience, not necessarily praising it.
|
|
|
Post by JDarkside on Jun 24, 2015 19:58:49 GMT -5
ight white architectural students; readers relate to the protagonist's struggle for individuality and pursuit of their passions in the wake of constant opposition. I've never once had qualms with playing the role of a female character in anything from Tomb Raider, Arcana Heart, Embodiment of Scarlet Devil, Portal 2, Timesplitters etc. because that's who the developers chose to let me control and the games were fun. When more minorities are involved in the gaming industry, you'll naturally see them create more characters inspired by themselves and their heroes. And I for one will be just fine with that as long as the games are great. But the idea that someone could hold a grudge against a great game because they, yet again, have to play as a straight white male, especially a heroic, charismatic one, is absurd to me. Yes, but are you a straight white male? If so, your perspective is skewed by the very nature of being a member of the majority. I understand and agree with what you're saying to a point, but it's a fallacy to think that just because YOU personally do not have a problem with something, no one else SHOULD have a problem with it. Also this. Interesting related point: Steven Universe is current Cartoon Network's most popular show. It's perfectly great for many reasons, but a lot of people also love that it portrays non-binary characters, homosexuality and bisexuality, and a non-traditional masculine male lead. These elements actually add a lot to the show and allow it to do things it normally wouldn't be able to, particularly Steven's personality. If you played it in a more "normal" way, the show would lose an element that makes it special.
|
|