10 ms·

It's silly how much goes into correctness in games nowadays. You'd have to make an Asteroids clone just not to offend anybody (except sentient asteroids...). J

• jkscm 12y ago
  Can you explain to what extend it is "silly" to make an effort to avoid sexism or racism?
  • Karunamon 12y ago
    It's silly to worry about it in the context of a fictional medium. Arguments have been made that, say, for instance, the human trafficking ring in Watch Dogs (recent video game) shouldn't have ever existed because it's overtly sexist, despite the fact that you break it up at the end of the mission arc. (To which I say: That's what human trafficking is. Sexist? Ya think?! People are being sold into slavery and you focus on sexism?) Such arguments ring as hollow as the railing against violence in video games. Saying what kind of artwork people should and shouldn't make transcends all *isms into straight-up repressiveness.
    • deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    • lewispollard 12y ago
      If we're talking serious /art/, I think the distinction is really, is this potentially offensive thing making a point that betters the perceived meaning of the game, or is it there because of lazy writing and tropes? In all art forms, it's the former that's generally granted high status.
    • d1me 12y ago
      > It's silly to worry about it in the context of a fictional medium. I respectfully disagree. I think it's extremely important to have discussions about various -isms in fiction. Fiction is a huge part of how we understand and view the world around us, and if our fiction has distorted worldviews, then we should know about it. What I took away from that anecdote instead, is that tact is a thing and so is knowing what to say when, and that maybe charged opinions on tangential issues should be left to some occasion other than when your friend is trying to show you something that she worked really hard on.
      • notduncansmith 12y ago
        > if our fiction has distorted worldviews, then we should know about it. You keep using that word, "fiction". I do not think it means what you think it means.
        • the_af 12y ago
          A lot has been written about how, for example, the best Science Fiction reflects something from the real world or makes us think about real world issues. It's, in my opinion, what turns good SF into truly great SF. There are even awards specifically made for SF that touches these real world issues (see the James Tiptree, Jr. Award [1], for example. And if you've never read fiction by Tiptree (R.I.P.), I strongly recommend her work!) So fiction often has meaning related to the real world. In my opinion it is entirely appropriate to worry when groups of people are generally misrepresented in fiction. Fiction that is completely divorced from reality is uninteresting to me and to a great deal many people. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Tiptree,_Jr._Award http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Tiptree,_Jr._Award
      • Karunamon 12y ago
        Though there's a huge difference between "knowing about it" and railing against it. My takeaway is that the Anita Sarkeesians (the person who made the argument against Watch Dogs that I mentioned) of the world want the same thing the Jack Thompsons of the world do - suppression (not recognition, suppression) of that which makes them uncomfortable, using a very weak appeal to the greater good in an attempt to legitimize it. And on a more meta level, I have yet to see so much as one criticism of any particular video game for $isms that was simultaneously: * Completely factual * Well researched * Not misleading * Not judgmental as to the game's target audience If such a thing were to exist, I think it would be a great boon to both the cause of social justice warriors and video gaming as a maturing art form. Unfortunately, everyone that's gone down this path, that I'm aware of, seems to abandon all of the above and instead create shrill, judgmental, self-congratulatory pieces that cause people with any ounce of rationality to sigh and move on.
  • betenoire 12y ago
    I don't think anyone said making an effort to avoid sexism or racism is silly.
  • pyre 12y ago
    But to what extent? Are all game worlds supposed to represent an ideal utopia? E.g. is the antagonist being sexist supporting sexism or is it a commentary on sexism? What about 'historical' games? Do we eliminate references to the Holocaust in WW2-era games because it might offend someone? I think that this is where the arguments get fuzzy. Everyone has a different idea of where the line is drawn.
  • metafex 12y ago
    Avoiding the topic of sexism and racism is worse than not talking about it. So yeah, avoiding it is silly: it helps nobody. What I was referring to, is the part of the article where everyone had to complain about something regarding the vision of the developers. My point was that it looks like it is a futile effort to comply with what everyone expects and that it is more important to concentrate being happy creating something.
  • gnarbarian 12y ago
    Would you demand the same of other art forms? We don't tell artists what to paint. If something is offensive it's deemed 'powerful' for the emotions it's capable of invoking. If we hate it we move on and don't look at that painting. We all have the right to an opinion about art but we are not entitled to forcing our opinions on those who create it.
    • anextio 12y ago
      Other art forms have been subject to feminist and other criticism for a long time. Only recently has attention been turned to video games, as the genre is so new. The reaction from a minority in the video games community seems to view this criticism as an extraordinary attack, even some kind of corruption or conspiracy if you listen to some people on reddit. These recent controversies (#GamerGate included) look pretty transparent from people with no stakes in the game. A lot of really violent backlash against an industry that is growing up. If a book is published, it is allowed for journalists or other writers to say that this book is abhorrent for x, y, and z. It is also allowed for them to criticize and chastise the author for writing such an abhorrent book. This is not the same as censorship. When a large part of society condemns something for whatever reason, or if a certain segment wishes to use their arguments to try convince enough people that something should be condemned, this is a natural, largely unpredictable, and unrelenting process that happens all the time to reflect shifting social values and morals. It's folly to fight that, and the trick is predicting where it will go. In my opinion, that is how companies and institutions survive. A few years ago it might have been in (any random abstract) company's best interest to fire a gay employee. Regardless of the views of the decision maker at that company, for the sake of PR, this is the way it goes. These days, that decision goes the other way, particularly on the national scale. The game studios are subject to these kinds of effects too, and that is what what will hurt the status quo of games in the long run (although there are arguments to be made that the desired status quo is already long gone, I dunno, it's been a while since I was attached to the games industry).
    • chipsy 12y ago
      There are many creators out there who want to remain completely uncritical. They are happy they made something, and they don't need to be told that they're doing it wrong, because their goals were internal and self-set from the beginning. But the whole premise of the artist even trying to speak to an audience is to decide what is important to say, what is necessary and what is unnecessary - both what the audience will like, and what is good for them to like. And so artists who are aiming not just to say anything, but to say the "best" things possible, eventually gravitate towards a critical lens. Critique is a discussion that is semi-private: It takes place between the critic and the artist, and not the audience as a whole. Audience members have the final decision in that they can walk away from the resulting discourse, but this doesn't mean that they need to intervene and announce which things should or should not be open for critique. When the audience does intervene directly in criticism, it generally amounts to bullying of either the critic or the artist, or sometimes both; it's not productive. Where this dialogue becomes messy is when the space of discussion has not been agreed upon: Should this discussion aim for criticism or not? If "no," simply say you're thinking that. But if you're presenting an argument to avoid criticism as a means of shutting down a criticism, you're being a bully.
  • vezzy-fnord 12y ago
    It's silly, because there's a difference between portraying something and endorsing it. Yet it seems there is a shocking number of people out there today who cannot make that difference.
  • bobcostas55 12y ago
    There is literally nothing wrong with sexism or racism being present in games. It's just another American moralistic panic thing, like nudity or sex in games. Generally perpetrated by people unable to differentiate between fantasy and reality. Murdering hordes of people in brutal ways: perfectly fine. A nipple: THINK OF THE CHILDREN! Non-Politically Correct aspects: SOMEONE THINK OF...THE MINORITIES?
    • Hytosys 12y ago
      What exactly is "non-politcally correct"? In what ways do discrimination and dehumanization of certain peoples involve politics? I hear you and agree that we should be allowed to explore fantasies. However, when one's sexist fantasies are similar to one's reality, intervention is reasonable. Concrete example: cat-calling.
      • gnarbarian 12y ago
        How is telling someone how to make their game any different than telling a woman how to dress?
        • Hytosys 12y ago
          I don't see how this is relevant as I did not suggest game makers should make different games. Rather I was simply commenting on the observation that there are social issues regarding sex and gender in our world, and that many video games showcase them (usually unintentionally).
          • gnarbarian 12y ago
            Can you name a single form of media that doesn't showcase sex and gender in our world? Also Why is this a bad thing?
  • Hytosys 12y ago
    I fear that this comment spurred the wrong discussion. Sexism and racism addressed in video games is not the problem -- 12 Years a Slave, She's the Man, and 10 Things I Hate About You are not the problem. The problem is that games like Red Dead Redemption, Hitman, and Grand Theft Auto systematically reward sexist and racist behavior (tying a woman to train tracks, brutalizing prostitutes, etc.). Many refute the idea that video games can affect a player's long-term behavior, and as far as I know both sides of that argument are difficult to study and prove. I do hypothesize, however, that these video games reinforce or at least mimic the very real disregard and dehumanization of females in society. It's not so much video games that are the collective problem, it's people. EDIT: I am realizing this comment is being interpreted as if I were suggesting a ban on certain qualities of video games. I am not. I am only postulating some sort of parallel between video games and real life.
    • jiggy2011 12y ago
      These games reward violent behaviour against all kinds of people, all of the GTA games I played involved killing many more men than women and probably more whites than blacks.
    • aikah 12y ago
      > The problem is that games like Red Dead Redemption, Hitman, and Grand Theft Auto systematically reward sexist and racist behavior (tying a woman to train tracks, brutalizing prostitutes, etc.). A game is a work of fiction.FICTION.it doesnt mean developpers fantasize on rape or that it will turn player into sex offenders.When did COD turn players into mass murderers ? never. When did GTA turn players into car jackers ? or thugs ? I remember new york city being pretty violent in the early 80's.GTA didnt exist... Game X or Y didnt make the nazi kill jews... or made Ted Bundy be what he was ... Reminds me Resident Evil 5 c"ontroversy" when "people" were outraged because players were killing blacks ... What the hell ? the game is set up in Africa, for christ sake...there will be some black people there ... RE5 didnt make the US south racist or lynch negros ...did it ? > Many refute the idea that video games can affect a player's long-term behavior, and as far as I know both sides of that argument are difficult to study and prove. Because people CAN tell the difference between reality and fiction.For those who cant , videogames are not to blame.They have issues at first place. So yes,let's continue to have violence against women,objectified women in video games,just like men are objectified and raped and killed in videogames. If only women were brutalized,you may have had a point,but that's not the case,at all. that's why all this social justice warfare against videogames is silly.These are just game and do not turn people into monsters,trolls,racists,rapists,killers or whatever. I want game artists to be able to express themself without fear of finger pointing by people totally unrelated to gaming. If players dont like it,then they will not buy it.Let the market work... So enough with all this already.A few people made a quick buck out of social justice warfare,good for them, but let us not fall for all that crap.
  • imaginenore 12y ago
    Let's cater to every group of people then. Let's make games black and white so we don't offend colorblind people. No, let's remove graphics at all, because that excludes blind people. And no sound, that is exclusionary towards the deaf. You see, anybody can be offended by anything. You offend me by your dumb attempts to control art, for instance. So why don't you stop doing it?
  • A_COMPUTER 12y ago
    Sure, I can explain that. I'll even quote from the article, because I think it's true: "Everyone brings their political agenda to the table when it comes to female characters in videogames; everyone complains if the women don’t match their particular vision. I start to wonder if the only way to win this game is not to have women at all." You are acting like there is one standard of racism and sexism that all reasonable people agree to. As soon as you do anything risky, you find out how untrue that is. And as the quote alludes to, you could hurt the representation of (in that case) women by playing it too safe. "Political correctness" is when the effort taken to avoid sexism and racism goes too far. And no, nobody agrees on that line either.
• desaurido 12y ago
  I always found it silly that the main character can murder hundreds of people in the most gruesome way, but any hint of racism/sexism is enough to enrage everyone. Is racism/sexism really that much worse from torture and murder that it's ok to use the later for storytelling, but the former always brings an outcry from the community?
  • metafex 12y ago
    Best example for this is Tomb Raider: The start of it was so awesome, a breath of fresh air showing that games can be w/o killing hundreds of people. Unfortunately ~2 hours in the game that got lost. Oh but the people complained about the bad story-telling then, go figure...
  • rmc 12y ago
    Or a high fantasy game that has non-white male characters. Dragons and magic and throwing out all of science are OK, but you heaven help you if you aren't (what some think of as) historially accurate.
    • vonmoltke 12y ago
      Do you have any actual examples of this? I have never played a fantasy game where all the characters were white males and have never heard any complaints about that. Shit, I don't think I have played a high fantasy game where all the characters were human.
      • astrange 12y ago
        I'm not sure what he's talking about, but there were a lot of complaints about the movie Frozen (set in Denmark). They seemed to be based on: - people thinking the movie starred the Sámi people, an indigenous people who live in Norway, which is not Denmark. - people thinking the Sámi people have dark skin, because they're called "indigenous people" on Wikipedia, and the Inuit are also called "indigenous people" on Wikipedia. - a popular tumblr blog called medievalpoc which regularly claims that people from European history (Goethe, Martin Luther, etc.) were actually "black people" and their representation in art is a cover-up. Although personally I don't think animation needs to be historically accurate! Or starring people instead of, say, talking dogs.
• vajorie 12y ago
  > It's silly how much goes into [political] correctness in games nowadays. This ain't a "political correctness" problem. Political correctness is probably not even what you think it is. Political correctness is about, for example, being able to say in your own mind "Watermelon-Eaters" (?) while speaking outwardly about "African American"s. It's that case of the anchorperson who says "N-Word" and enjoys that the audience goes "Nigger" in their minds. It's about the guy who thinks "I'd rape you if I wouldn't get caught" and speaks "Young Lady" with a polite smile to the person in the next cubicle. Or about the one who speaks of "having fun creating and playing a game" but who actually is mentally masturbating to his impossibly (em)bodied ideal woman. This is about representation. Lack of representation silences population segments and educates them in the false premises of the status quo as if they were real (into self-hatred). Mis-representation enables others to discriminate against these segments and remain in peace with the violence they inflict upon their others. Reclaiming one's representation is an important step in consciousness raising efforts because you get to learn that you do not need to, nor should, become this absurd representation that you are served in almost every possible venue as the ideal, the idealized, the desirable. Then, this is about construction --the "normal" culture's efforts to produce and ever reproduce its own deranged fantasies and imageries that serve to maintain said status quo. Furthermore, most critical thinkers and media analysts who know what they are doing also already know that, in a [insert discrimination type here] culture, the production of non-discriminatory material is impossible. It ain't silly to keep thinking critically and having fun de- and re-constructing imageries to show the underlying fuck-ups. Regardless of who produces said cultural product and what excuses they use to legitimize their work (or, whatever else they do for free advertisement).
• aikah 12y ago
  Politics are ruining videogames. It was one of the last medium where people just didnt care,but now game journalists or even game companies give a tribune to people that are not gamers,that dont care about gaming and with whom it's all about social justice warfare , i.e. manifactured outrage, to divide gamers on things that are hardly related to gaming and make the gaming community look like trolls. Everybody knows who i'm talking about. I dont want video games to be like TV,or cinema. I want it to be basically interactive cartoons for children/young adults/adults,like it always has been. Not every game is suited for every audience,but adult games shouldnt be PC because fear of being a victim of social justice warriors. And if social justice warriors want politicaly correct games,let them write games and see how successfull they are.
  • Loughla 12y ago
    And you've gotten to the point with most art. It's not a human right to access art and entertainment. Therefore, art and entertainment really don't owe us anything in terms of considering our feelings or opinions. All they owe us is to be interesting and entertaining enough to make us want to spend money or time on them. BUT, because we live in a very privileged society (any first world country at least), we have nothing better to worry about than whether or not the new Half Life has a strong woman character in it, or whether or not it portrays minorities in a positive light. Somewhere along the way people got it in their heads that they can dictate what is art and what is entertainment to other people. This has been a struggle since the dawn of time, I believe. The only problem is that now we have a medium for communication that allows these shallow, backward censors to find each other and be much, much louder than they should be. I love Leisure Suit Larry simply because it is hilariously sexist. I also treat the women in my life and women I meet as equals in all aspects of my personal and professional life. It's as if, in some cases, there can be a disconnect between what I do as entertainment and who I am as a person. It's also as if there exist certain items for certain audiences. I'll not let my 10 year old play leisure suit larry; then again, I'm not going to bother with candy crush nonsense, he can have it. People need to learn that not everything can make them happy, and that the world isn't sunshine and puppies. Sorry for the lengthy (vaguely off-topic) response, but this really strikes a nerve. Fun fact - my graduate studies are in Critical Pedagogy in Educational Leadership, emphasis in Social Justice. The current incarnation of "Social Justice" is so far from what individuals like bell hooks, Paulo Freire, Maxine Greene and Henry Giroux had in mind that it's fucking ridiculous and absolutely infuriating.
• grayclhn 12y ago
  I read the article, came back to your comment, and really have no idea what your comment has to do with the article. You'd probably have fewer downvotes if you explained what part of the article you think you're replying to. (I didn't downvote, btw.)
  • deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
    • deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
• mrcharles 12y ago
  I downvoted you because you misunderstood the point of that section of the article. It's not about 'offending' people, it's about consistently and invisibly leaving people out. It's easy for us white dudes (as I assume you are, based on your post) to say "games should just be whatever!" because we implicitly have the privilege of identifying with the inevitable white dude main character. The few times the character isn't a white dude washes right off of us because we are absolutely used to a character that conforms to us. Others don't have that. This isn't 'politics' it's about being inclusive and realizing that it's actually trivially easy to do so in most cases. I've been making games professionally for over 15 years now. The progress we are making is fantastic because the main problem with games is that game designers are lazy. When we go with grimdark white dude, it is lazy. When game developers are forced to not be lazy, everybody wins. Because at the very least, you cannot argue with the fact that lazy design is always going to be inferior to non-lazy design.
  • metafex 12y ago
    Okay, I understood this part of the article 'you can't do everyone justice'. As for the 'white dude' part: lucky guess ;-) But I personally can't identify with the flat stereotypes in games, it just doesn't work for me. I also will never say "games should be just whatever", they are just so much more to me. I love the stories, seeing worlds that never have been and never will be. That's what games are for me about. To the politics: My part was about workplace politics, but you are right about the game politics, it is good to take the extra mile and reach out.
    • mrcharles 12y ago
      Well this statement: "Just make your game fun, challenging or whatever your goal is and have fun making it." Sounds very much like "don't worry about inclusiveness, games should be whatever you want them to be!" Which is true but if you want your games to be exclusionary then don't be surprised when people call you on it.
      • metafex 12y ago
        It is really hard to say what you mean when you only have words to describe what you feel. I hope you can take this as an apology, I don't wan't to hurt any feelings with what I do or say, it is just too easy to loose the passion for what you do when all you do is trying to meet expectations. I learned that the hard way.