363 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

You are making the false assumption that getting industry and culture to change is the same as getting laws passed.
Unless you plan on protesting in the streets for mandatory equality ratios of video game characters world wide, the two methods aren't congruent.
The government can't get out of the business of dealing with its citizenry. A company can very easily digest itself of any given genre or industry it suddenly views as too work intensive or antagonistic.
Also, marching in the streets =/= complaining on Tumblr, for the record. There's nothing extreme or in-your-face about the SJW types except their poor Internet etiquette.

I'm not making a false assumption, because that is precisely how the representation of both women and LGBT characters improved in TV and movies.

The hate die DA2 and ME3 was nothing more than rants on the Internet - but that led to a major change for DAI and for the EC. So to say that poor manners and rants on the Internet won't lead to results seems entirely misguided.

Now, you might argue that there are not enough people ranting about this to make a change. But angry stuff on the Internet is clearly proven to work.

[Fast Jimmy]

I've never understood the whole "vote with your wallet" argument. Are you just not allowed to complain about something you find objectionable? Should you somehow be silenced? Why is it desirable to shift the pressure from developers to consumers? To my way of thinking, if someone wants to complain loudly and obnoxiously on Tumblr or whatever, let them. Freedom to make the game you want doesn't mean freedom from criticism, after all.
It just seems like the familiar double bind: If people complain about the lack of representation in gaming, then they're entitled brats who needs to shut up. But if they don't complain and just vote with their wallet like you say, then everyone will think, "Hey, there's no problem. Games are selling, and nobody's complaining, so what's the big deal?" Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Or, the more logical reason in my mind... instead of complaining about more developers not doing what you want, promoting the products of the developer/companies/organizations who are?


There was an interesting study published this month about how effective public campaigns for changing health behaviors are done. It was found that to get someone to do something once, like take a breast examine once a year, it was more effective to use a "negative" tone, focusing on the dangers and increased risk if you did not get the screening. On the other hand, to get people to change habits on a daily basis, like choosing the right foods, smoking cessation, getting more exercise, etc., POSITIVE messages were more effective. Telling everyone the benefits of avoiding high fat foods, such as increased mood and confidence as well as longer life span, was more effective than saying "people who eat fatty foods are X% more likely to die of a heart attack."

I mention this because I think it speaks volumes to human psychology. Complaining and hurling insults is very much a negative response - it focuses on "do this request or you'll lose my sale, as well as be labeled as indifferent to the plight of X!" Such comaints will often just get you a token response and a superficial way to placate the response.

On the other hand, finding games you believe were done well, that promote the type of ideals and design that you find beneficial and getting your friends to buy, pushing for acclaim of the game and writing reviews on sites like Amazon or Metacritic... this is ALL much more likely to encourage the behavior in a more effective way.

Equate the companies you like with good, well-represented games, not the companies you don't like with hatred and bigotry. Because after a certain point, the negative complaints lose their sting and just become noise to ignore, not advice to be followed.

[Mr.House]

There's a difference between a SJW and a valid request for equlaity and such. Changing a characters skin colour because you think the character was dark skinned in a concept art and now white in the game  makes Bioware  a racist is an example of a SJW. People wanting women to have better roles in video games is not. People seem to think both are the same when it's not. SJW find issues in anything that deals with gender, sex and race.

[In Exile]

There's a difference between a SJW and a valid request for equlaity and such. Changing a characters skin colour because you think the character was dark skinned in a concept art and now white in the game  makes Bioware  a racist is an example of a SJW. People wanting women to have better roles in video games is not. People seem to think both are the same when it's not. SJW find issues in anything that deals with gender, sex and race.

When did this skin colour thing happen (I'm guessing it's actually happened ...)? I'm honestly curious.

[xAmilli0n]

But don't you see that the one doing the most yelling is the SJW belligerent? They yell over everyone, including those who would have otherwise supported their cause.

 

But that's besides the point, I do agree with you somewhat on your points. Slow change I feel is better because the quality of that change can be in it of itself better, more genuine, and much more fleshed out in terms of content. What I find is a lot of SJW's don't care about quality, only quantity. To bring it back to DA, during a thread about having asians in the game, a massive debate raged about how it should be done, whether asians should be given a nation of origin and culture, or if everyone from other existing nations should just be re-textured to look asian. Both sides supported asians in the game, but one wanted it done with more effort and time then the other did, and what I found was there were more people in the SJW camp in the "slap on a retexture" camp, and more non-sjw's in the "expand the lore" camp.

 

This illustrates the different approaches to change, and how truly different they are. The SJW's in the asian thread were more quick to call people racists for not supporting them, or telling them that it would be better to expand the lore to include them, because they wanted it now. This is a sign of passion, but its passion that isn't being directed in the right way, and its mixing with a impatience that would have created a rather silly and stupid way of exclusivity, such as a orlisan noble man who looks like jet lee or cao cao.

 

That isn't good inclusivity, thats just shameless retexturing, and it is the result of wanting things now instead of later, rushed instead of done with precision and care. There are massive benefits to doing things slowly and building up a massive support in the mainstream fanbase for this to happen, and I think the impatience of the SJW's, like so many other things, kills off the support others have because it makes them come off as highly demanding, and unreasonable.

 

You bring up a very important point.  Much of this yelling is indeed misguided, directionless, and frankly at times petty.  But it does achieve one thing, bringing attention to the important matter that it is based on.  To use your example, arguing for Asians in DA.  In a world of fiction where we have dwarves, elves, and other fantastical creatures, specifically asking for Asian in the game is somewhat insignificant.  However, it brings the attention to the need for a varied human cast and PC that people of various backgrounds can connect with.  Everyone is different, why not reflect that in game?

 

These are the things that matter.  We don't wish to re-texture a game or simply be appeased with token characters, as such a game is guaranteed to fail, and achieves nothing.  But by using this momentum to bring the heart of the matter to light, we can start change now, rather than later.  It still wont happen overnight.

 

So I have to deal with being associated with few people many have come to dislike.  Meh.  Being branded a SJW is insignificant to me.

[Mr.House]

When did this skin colour thing happen (I'm guessing it's actually happened ...)? I'm honestly curious.

Happen with Sera on tumblr(a SJW haven). Bunch of people got mad that she was white and insist she was dark skinned int he concept art(which if you looked, you would tell it's the lighting that makes her dark) so they called Bioware a racist and one person outright recloured Sera and they don't see how this is the same as the white Isabela mod. Crap like that IS a issue and is an example of a SJW.

[Mr.House]

 

Best post here, 11/10

[xAmilli0n]

Spoiler

 

At the end of the day, all the arguments could be summed up like this.

 

[In Exile]

Happen with Sera on tumblr(a SJW haven). Bunch of people got mad that she was white and insist she was dark skinned int he concept art(which if you looked, you would tell it's the lighting that makes her dark) so they called Bioware a racist and one person outright recloured Sera and they don't see how this is the same as the white Isabela mod. Crap like that IS a issue and is an example of a SJW.

Yeah... That's not really social justice as much as it is the looney bin. My issue with the label is that social justice is a real and important concept, and using the word as a pejorative against the loons is just a loss for all of us.

[Jorji Costava]

Or, the more logical reason in my mind... instead of complaining about more developers not doing what you want, promoting the products of the developer/companies/organizations who are?

 

Interesting, but I think there are two questionable assumptions here. First, there's the assumption that you can't both critique stuff you don't like and support stuff you do like; these aren't mutually exclusive activities, after all. Second and more importantly, there's the assumption that when you critique objectionable content in games, movies, etc., the only audience you're addressing is the developers, and your only goal is to make them change their products right then and there. That isn't necessarily the case.

 

Here's an example: Chinua Achebe didn't write his famous essay on why Conrad's Heart of Darkness is racist (no, I'm not going to get into a debate on whether or not he's right about this) with the expectation that Conrad would come back to life and change the way he wrote. Rather, Achebe was attempting to change how readers perceived the work; right or wrong, his essay wasn't useless right off the bat just because Conrad was too dead to change Heart of Darkness.

 

Similarly with games, critique is just as much for gaming audiences as it is for gaming developers. And it seems plain to me that such critique can serve a valuable function even if it doesn't directly and immediately lead to developers making changes in response to it. We all get annoyed when people like Roger Ebert talk about how games aren't art, but if we do want to think of games in this way, then the conversation around games has to rise to the appropriate level; that can't happen if questions about racism or sexism in games are barred at the outset.

 

EDIT: Added some stuff, and fixed some phrasing.

[Fast Jimmy]

I'm not making a false assumption, because that is precisely how the representation of both women and LGBT characters improved in TV and movies.
The hate die DA2 and ME3 was nothing more than rants on the Internet - but that led to a major change for DAI and for the EC. So to say that poor manners and rants on the Internet won't lead to results seems entirely misguided.
Now, you might argue that there are not enough people ranting about this to make a change. But angry stuff on the Internet is clearly proven to work.

The EC is a perfect example of what complaining gets you, though - a fast, rushed attempt to create something you feel will shut he most people up. It helped a lot of people accept the endings, yes, but it did so by adding a thin veneer of cosmetic paint that addressed very few of the underlying problems.

If Ubisoft included a random female avatar for its co-op mode, would that help with the "women in gaming" issue? Doesn't their work with the AC: Liberation game, which devoted large amounts of content to a pretty well-written female protagonist, have done that? Yet one approach that gives a female minority a good shake in a role barely registers on the SJW radar, while an optional MP mode not including female skins makes Ubisoft mysoginistic.


Which approach do you honestly think would encourage developers more - the honey or the vinegar? If Liberation had sold as much as other AC games, they would have given the female her own series. Instead, it was largely ignored by fans and critics alike (including their female ones) and they were not given positive reinforcement for their efforts. So now you'll get a patched-in avatar for the MP mode her in about six months and a good female protag will wind up unused in future content.

Rah, rah, Internet rage.

[xAmilli0n]

Rah, rah, Internet rage.

 

Thats my new sig, thanks.

[Fast Jimmy]

Yeah... That's not really social justice as much as it is the looney bin. My issue with the label is that social justice is a real and important concept, and using the word as a pejorative against the loons is just a loss for all of us.

The difference is that today, the line between the two is insanely blurry for such First World social issues such as video game character ethnicities. Again, my comment on women being stoned to death here in the 21st century are things people should be violently up in arms about, not whether developer art is changing how tan a character is.

[In Exile]

The EC is a perfect example of what complaining gets you, though - a fast, rushed attempt to create something you feel will shut he most people up. It helped a lot of people accept the endings, yes, but it did so by adding a thin veneer of cosmetic paint that addressed very few of the underlying problems.
If Ubisoft included a random female avatar for its co-op mode, would that help with the "women in gaming" issue? Doesn't their work with the AC: Liberation game, which devoted large amounts of content to a pretty well-written female protagonist, have done that? Yet one approach that gives a female minority a good shake in a role barely registers on the SJW radar, while an optional MP more not including female skins makes Ubisoft mysoginistic.
Which approach do you honestly think would encourage developers more - the honey or the vinegar? If Liberation had sold as much as other AC games, they would have given the female her own series. Instead, it was largely ignored by fans and critics alike (including their female ones) and they were not given positive reinforcement for their efforts. So now you'll get a patched-in avatar for the MP mode her in about six months and a good female protag will wind up unused in future content.
Rah, rah, Internet rage.

Wasn't liberation released on some random (read: not DS) handheld? And how do you know it was ignored in terms of it having a female protagonist ? I've seen people on this forum praise it. The same with mirrors edge.

You focus on the EC, but why not focus on DAI? The rage over DA2 didn't just bring back player races, it led to a fourth race in the qunari. There are now 4 VAs, not 2. Is that substantial enough? Is it just a skin?

[Fast Jimmy]

Interesting, but I think there are two questionable assumptions here. First, there's the assumption that you can't both critique stuff you don't like and support stuff you do like; these aren't mutually exclusive activities, after all. Second and more importantly, there's the assumption that when you critique objectionable content in games, movies, etc., the only audience you're addressing is the developers, and your only goal is to make them change their products right then and there. That isn't necessarily the case.
 
Here's an example: Chinua Achebe didn't write his famous essay on why Conrad's Heart of Darkness is racist (no, I'm not going to get into a debate on whether or not he's right about this) with the expectation that Conrad would come back to life and change the way he wrote. Rather, Achebe was attempting to change how readers perceived the work; right or wrong, his essay wasn't useless right off the bat just because there was no way Conrad was too dead to change Heart of Darkness.
 
Similarly with games, critique is just as much for gaming audiences as it is for gaming developers. And it seems plain to me that such critique can serve a valuable function even if it doesn't directly and immediately lead to developers making changes in response to it. We all get annoyed when people like Roger Ebert talk about how games aren't art, but if we do want to think of games in this way, then the conversation around games has to rise to the appropriate level; that can't happen if questions about racism or sexism in games are barred at the outset.
 
EDIT: Added some stuff.

But that is counter to what I said in my original post - I said not to just say nice things so the developer hears, but to promote he product - to your friends, to your peers and to the general public. If you like how a game does something, scream it from the rooftops. That's word of mouth sales and it is one of the most powerful forms of advertisement you can do for a game.

Voting with your wallet doesn't just mean one copy more or less for a developer. Your wallet means every tool you have to promote the thing you view as bringing equality to the world.

Find the content and the companies who are working hard every day to create the content you want to see more of. Trust me - there are plenty if you dig deep enough. Fund them, support them, encourage them and tell everyone you know (or don't know) about the wonderful product they are making. THAT'S consumerism. THAT'S voting with your wallet.

Because for every game that passes by, doing exactly what you demand of other developers, but goes without making much of an impact, you kill by neglect the entire premise.

[In Exile]

The difference is that today, the line between the two is insanely blurry for such First World social issues such as video game character ethnicities. Again, my comment on women being stoned to death here in the 21st century are things people should be violently up in arms about, not whether developer art is changing how tan a character is.

What makes you think the same people aren't doing something about it? And so what if they're not? The issue of representation doesn't somehow become irrelevant because there's a bigger problem out there. And what should they be doing instead? Marchi fi the streets? Asking for an invasion?

This is such a lame dodge. The fact that these people are hypocrites doesn't make them wrong. It just makes them hypo rates who happen to be right.

Not to mention that I don't think there's anything wrong with focusing on our own society to exclusion of all others.

[Fast Jimmy]

Wasn't liberation released on some random (read: not DS) handheld? And how do you know it was ignored in terms of it having a female protagonist ? I've seen people on this forum praise it. The same with mirrors edge.
You focus on the EC, but why not focus on DAI? The rage over DA2 didn't just bring back player races, it led to a fourth race in the qunari. There are now 4 VAs, not 2. Is that substantial enough? Is it just a skin?

The extra races were not borne of complaints. The complaints of no race selection were occuring, LOUDLY, before DA2 even came out. DA:I was still planned and imagined as a human only game, even with the highest critiques of the human only DA2. Only the expansion of the project's budget and time table were additional races and VO's added. Almost three years of Bioware saying "we're doing human only" wasn't changed by the compIaints. It was changed by someone making the case "if you give us more money, we can increase sales by X by doing Y." That Y just happened to be something people had been very vocal about. If people were being very vocal and Bioware still could not see sales increasing because of it, then it wouldn't have been implemented.

Assassin's Creed: Liberation was a PS Vita exclusive starting out, but was released on PC, PS3 and 360 through Steam, the PSN store and XBL, respectively. When released on the main systems, it had an HD graphics upgrade and significant amounts of new content and only came with a $20 price tag.

[Fast Jimmy]

What makes you think the same people aren't doing something about it? And so what if they're not? The issue of representation doesn't somehow become irrelevant because there's a bigger problem out there. And what should they be doing instead? Marchi fi the streets? Asking for an invasion?
This is such a lame dodge. The fact that these people are hypocrites doesn't make them wrong. It just makes them hypo rates who happen to be right.
Not to mention that I don't think there's anything wrong with focusing on our own society to exclusion of all others.

There's nothing wrong with looking in your own back yard instead of someone else's, but just realize people will laugh at you and not take you seriously when you are complaining about a puddle when other neighbors are experiencing a flood.

[Inquisitor Recon]

"Social justice" has never been about real justice. If the phrase ever had some legitimacy in the past it has long been trashed by people who can't accept that society doesn't conform to their views and beief.

Their double standards and hypocrisy is quite impressive, and supposed "victims" like Anita-whoever have raked in more than enough money to ever be considered victims.

Developers should be focused on creating the best game possible and maximizing the time and money they have to work with. While sales of course have to be considered all of this "social justice" nonsense shouldn't even be on their list of concerns.

Nobody will remember a game based on the viewpoints of these SJWs, they will remember it based on story, gameplay, graphics, audio, etc.

And as much as the SJW types harp on about freedom, choice, and all of that, they love telling gamers and devs what they can and cannot do. Torture and abuse are only acceptable to portray on their terms! That's actually worse than those groups out there who go on shouting about the evils of video games and how such content shouldn't be portrayed at all.

[xAmilli0n]

Nobody will remember a game based on the viewpoints of these SJWs, they will remember it based on story, gameplay, graphics, audio, etc.

 

But of course, nothing that devs do that promotes equality, or inclusion could ever be amongst those.  That would be preposterous.

[Nate Assassin]

No, I don't want to be askes IN A VIDEO GAME if I want to have sex with another man, nor IRL.

*gets umbrella for shitstorm*

[Fast Jimmy]

No, I don't want to be askes IN A VIDEO GAME if I want to have sex with another man, nor IRL.
*gets umbrella for shitstorm*

You don't want to be asked... because the answer is always yes?



Heh.