No, I don’t think it’s as simple as that. Politics are good in games when done right, but they can also be nothing more than a distraction when the narrative has huge errors or lacks and depth in general.
I mean, yeah, good writing is good and bad writing is bad.
I think the article is going against the idea that politics should be kept away from games.
Politics in games isn’t the issue.
It’s the concept of pushing real world politics in games that is the problem.
Sometimes they can overlap, but they needn’t to. Some things are just obviously pushing the agendas of developers, instead of making it feel like a legit part of the game universe.
I don’t really get this sentiment.
Elves being racist towards dwarves is acceptable in a game, but white humans being racist towards hispanic humans is “pushing agendas”?
I fault Bioware for a lot of things, but failing to invent a fantasy equivalent of the concept of gender is not one of them. Not everything needs to be moved to an otherworldly analogy just to avoid hurting the feelings of bigots.
Games are not a fundamental right. Artists should make art that reflects their values.
Sure, but I’m not required to buy that art
Exactly. Instead of complaining about polictics in gaming, just spend your money elsewhere if you don’t like it.
This isn’t right either. Inserting politics into anything serves that that up for discourse, and getting people discussing and thinking critically about a topic is a fantastic achievement for any medium that delves into the subject.
It’s when partisan messages about politics are inserted into a game that poses problems. Instead, video games should explore as many takes on an issue as capable in service to the story being told. Wow, it’s terrible that the horned people are aholes to the perfectly normal looking people, but how did that come to be? Is there any historical precedent where the shoe was on the other foot? I think of Jews and how 70 years ago they were facing extermination at the hands of Germans find themselves now in the position of the exterminator. How did that happen? That’s great material for exploring politics in games, to me.
And then it becomes “game is failing due to being boycotted by incels” Won’t anyone think about the profit margins
Not required to what by that art?
Not just in games, but often times the point of the story’s fake politics is to be a parable for real politics. But that’s also the fun of it, even if you disagree with the story’s intended message.
What do you mean by “real world politics”? Don’t be shy, tell us.
Yes politics are great in videogames, if the writers don’t share just 1 braincell like with many current AAA(A) games.
You’d think it’s common knowledge, yet they still churn out these depthless, one dimensional millenial writing slop.
Politics in video games used to be: metal gear solid.
Politics in video games now is: is that a grill protagonist in my vydia game?
Politics are irrelevant
Good writing is good and bad writing is bad
I understand that half of the world is currently healing psychological trauma from the US election results but Atlus has been commenting on politics in their games for much longer.
Politics is not actual politics, its not normative womans, gays and trans people. Metaphor its ok because don’t have any of those (I’m only 20hs in)
I can’t explain why no one talks about baldur 3. I suppose its too complex for those people.
its not normative womans, gays and trans people.
Not broad enough. When “gamers” say that something is political, what they mean is that it contains politics they disagree with. The ones you cited just happen to be the things they easily recognize because their favorite right wing grifter is raging about them 24/7.
As you also said, they usually don’t have the media literacy required to recognize more subtle political messages, which can be pretty funny. I remember when Disco Elysium was first released and they were very confused because it contains some actual, pretty deep political reflections
Games have a large male audience and many of those males are white. When new games focus on protagonists and issues that do not resonate with white males, this aggravates the audience and it only takes a few vocal few to whip the group into toxic online behavior.
Metaphor is set in a fantasy world populated by Japanese. The characters may seem to be of a multiracial society, but it’s understood that this is not a western game but an eastern one through a western lens. It could have the most radical political discourse but as players we quietly accept that this is a foreign story and not one that reflects on western issues and prejudices.
The opening moments of the story are about intense racism over the most minute differences.
Well, there’s politics… and there’s politics.
Nobody normal complains about politics in games, what people complain about is poor writing and US cultural idiosyncratic defaultism in games. Perhaps if ESA members hadn’t laid off the lion’s share of adult writers in the room to hire cheap, overwhelmingly ignorant, uneducated and straight out of college dev teams with a superiority complex, we could get good narratives. There’s a reason why everyone and their mothers keeps harping about indie games now, that’s where the laid off talent went, they make independent games now. But it’s cheaper to take “journos” to Disneyland than keeping a roster of devs with 10+ years experience. In the past, there was already a backlash on journos for their habitual prostitution to the companies they cover but that message was quickly erased in favour of “gAmErS aRe MiSoGyNiStIc”. Now, most traditional game news outlets are owned by a handful of holding companies, and most of their articles are AI generated drivel by, you guessed it, people not holding journalism degrees. Gaming journalism has become the off ramp of untalented and incompetent language/social science majors who are too inept to actually find a job in their field. That’s why we get this level of shitty journalism, because technically, they really don’t know what being a journalist is, from the ethics standards to the reporting without inserting personal bias. No self respecting journalist chooses covering hatsune miko’s latest release when there are so many conflicts in the world that need covering, so we get Felicity, Mars and Bruno, English major extraordinaires, who end up on a dead end career with wages capping at below 40k pounds per anum that justify their lack of journalistic ethics by “It’s the perk of the profession since we don’t get well paid”.
There were more articles covering game character sexuality than the mass lay offs of the last two years that left entire families without sustenance. Then people are surprised that orange nazi cheeto gets elected by the dumb yanks? The megaphone holders for social issues have room temp level IQ. When was the last time that a “game journo” or major dev from a AAA outlet seriously addressed relevant issues like social inequality or poverty? Do yourself a favour and compare the google interest in the topics “transgender”, “hunger”, “unionization” and “lay offs” and tell me that it isn’t by design that an issue that affects an infinitesimally small percentage of the population has so much air time in comparison to an ongoing genocide and hunger crisis in the global south. I guess rich white teen problems are more serious than brown people dying. The bourgeois left has set back the class struggle for 100 years. Enjoy the hard right turn of modern western society.
Edit: Jason Schreier is a good example of how to conduct yourself, he mostly keeps his private ideas to his social media but his work focuses on more relevant issues to a majority of the population.
There were more articles covering game character sexuality than the mass lay offs of the last two years that left entire families without sustenance.
No, there absolutely weren’t.
Schreier’s politics come out in his writing as well as social media. The drum he’s been beating for a long time has been about labor and unionizing.
I’d even consider the possibility he’s right, but not for reasons that support his argument.
Games and media present transgender and minority groups in an unobtrusive way, and bigots create 17 articles complaining about their basic inclusion for the sake of “DEI”.
Both GPT4 and Gemini estimate a 3:2 ratio between articles addressing video game character sexuality and those addressing lay offs and unionization in the games industry.
I won’t continue this discussion because “Schreier’s politics come out in his writing as well as social media. The drum he’s been beating for a long time has been about labor and unionizing.” is basically what I wrote on Schreier using more words, which indicates you’re more interested in being a confrontational than engaging in an honest discussion on the topic. Enjoy the Cheeto for 4y.
If you want to talk about an honest discussion, consider the sample set you plugged into your search. You didn’t go through two years of articles on VGC or GameSpot. You plugged indiscriminate search criteria into an AI. We just had a discussion a few days ago about how mainstream media is not covering major gaming news, but if you’re reading gaming news outlets, it’s been layoffs for the past two years dominating the news. Gaming news outlets would have very little reason to ever use the word “hunger”, for instance, and “transgender” would apply to far more articles than those about fictional characters.
Ai, google trends in english, what else does one need? Even after I gave precise google trends inputs so that the observations are reproducible? Your reply proves my point yet again. Peace.
Your precise Google Trends inputs are precisely what I took issue with, because they’re a bad sample set for reasons that I pointed out.
Both GPT4 and Gemini estimate a 3:2 ratio
I think you misspelled “I don’t know what I’m talking about nor what an LLM is”
Welcome redditor.
I see you have a 10 days old account. I can’t imagine why you had to create a new one… This one won’t last long, ironically you can go to r/gamergate and feel accepted.
Yes yes, whatever illusion you created in your head to make me some kind of monstrous being because I dared question the ubiquitous distortion of the class message in favour of bourgeoisie invented flags. I’m also the boogey man on my free time. It’s funny, all the replies I got fit just in line with the ones I’d get in r/conservative every time I shared climate change evidence.
Plot twist: you’re the one yearning for reedit!
But of course you’re DARED question the distortion of the class message… By complaining about diversity in video games…?
The funny thing is how everything you said so far would fit in a conservative forum, reddit or otherwise. It seems that’s where you have you go to find people agreeing with you. Should make you think (but it won’t)
Gaming “journalism” was always mostly crap.
Even in 1990s and 00s.
Ah, yes, of course… It had to be PC Gamer with this take.
Just make good games and and focus on that, the push to shove politics and activism into everything has everyone tired and burned out. It just builds skepticism from the wider gaming audience.
Massive props to Refantazio, honestly a very good game.
The rightwing/gamergate side not contesting this whole issue being called “Politics in videogames” is the biggest blunder. I don’t know the best way to call this phenomenon (political preaching?) but surely there is a better phrase. Right now you can’t talk about this stuff without getting hit by “Oh, you claim to hate politics in videogames yet you love Bioshock” type retort, when the actual thing people have problems with are californian nutcases pushing their views on US political crap onto the player as if it were gospel.
What is wrong with Californian views on identity politics, when it’s not just bad writing? Is it the acknowledgement of people that are gender nonbinary?
I just dislike a lot of the studios based there (Insomniac, naughty dog, ubisoft) for how hard they try to push POC/minority representation in their games. Especially when it doesn’t make sense (black samurai)
Naughty Dog’s most famous games (containing humans) are based around white male leads. It’s basically just Uncharted Lost Legacy and TLOU2 that have diverged from that, and not by very much.
Literally the only game of Insomniac’s I can find (outside of anthropomorphic games like Ratchet&Clank) that even leans to minorities is Spider-Man: Miles Morales, which is based on a comic character that was already popular. Even the games based around Peter were going to acknowledge he’s the type of person to work at food banks and embrace New York’s diversity; that’s the pre-existing character.
Nobody complained when Assassin’s Creed had Leonardo da Vinci hand you a tank or a glider, or a female Spartan mysthios fight mythical gods, or have London gang runners that fight in hoods from rooftops. Assassin’s Creed has always ventured into the unrealistically cinematic extensions of common historical myths, and they’re not even the first to turn Yasuke into a samurai. Netflix put out an animated series on that a while back and it was awesome.
I do not expect an answer, but I genuinely think you should quietly ask yourself the question: Are you a racist?
I’m thinking of three games specifically from these studios, TLOU2 basing the whole narrative around a woman hulk, spiderman 2 with the long story segments as Mary jane and the whole debacle on Yasuke. But yeah it’s not just these three california studios that are putting out games with this stuff, they are just the first that come to mind.
Nobody complained when Assassin’s Creed had Leonardo da Vinci hand you a tank or a glider
Yeah fair enough, people will have different lines in the sand for this stuff. I get that this series has time travel and aliens and whatever, but I think everyone can agree that if they randomly put, for example, modern sportscars into a historical setting it would be too unbelievable and ruin immersion. A massive black samurai slaughtering asians in feudal japan (and then seeing them bow down to him in another scene) has that effect for me.
(For the record I did look up on primary sources from japanese historians and everything points to the man being just Nobunaga’s pet curiosity. It helps that here’s all the shady stuff going on where the english and japanese versions of Thomas Lockley’s books say different things)
Are you a racist?
I am not. I just dislike when developers sacrifice the game’s story, quality or whatever in order to put in representation. I don’t understand why the story can’t just have a diverse cast and be done with it, right now it feels like all these studios are focusing on diversity first and foremost as a major selling point when it should be just a normal thing that doesn’t need to be highlighted
No matter how many times I reread this comment, I don’t see how this reasoning would convince anyone - including yourself - of its position. The point about translation, for instance, not only feels like a non-sequitor but ignores the wealth of subjectivity that inherently goes into translating text to other languages.
I’m not trying to reject you just out of spite; I genuinely don’t think internet arguments like this are ever “winnable” for anyone. If you come up with a better description for what it is you oppose, feel free to mention it, but otherwise, I’d say do some self-reflecting.
The point about translation, for instance
I want to touch up on this. The reason I didn’t write much about my claim about for Yasuke not being a proper samurai is because it is my understanding that it is the default position and thus doesn’t need to be proven by evidence. But if I was asked to provide evidence, I would link the comparison of his translated and untranslated book in this post. Since Thomas Lockley is the main source behind the myth, I think discrediting his book should be enough to also discredit Yasuke’s role as a proper samurai.
We acknowledge that the game is a work of fiction. Historical fiction, but fiction none-the-less.
If every fifth character is also black, I think there is a point that can be made about verisimilitude and taking liberties; but since we know he really existed and that there has been debate on what he did, having a work of fiction that portrays him as a samurai under Nobunga doesn’t seem unreasonable.
To compare, we know that Leonardo Di Vinci didn’t hand out guns to people or build functional flying machines - but we know he designed all sorts of stuff ahead of its time, so it kinda fits in a fictional story with him in.
But only one of those seems to draw huge amounts of complaints online… And it’s actually the less historically accurate one.
This made my dick black and gay and now it lives in Palo Alto.
The lead developer of Assassin’s Creed: Shadows is in Quebec. And does it not matter that it’s based on a historical figure? Consider also that in California, you’re just more likely to encounter a diverse group of people, so wouldn’t that just be representing the world around them?
Yeah fair enough, this stuff isn’t unique to Californian developers, they are just the first that come to mind.
And does it not matter that it’s based on a historical figure?
Yasuke existed in Japan but I think they went too far in making him a protagonist. As I understand it he was a curiosity that Nobunaga kept around, not a full fledged samurai. I think it’s also important to consider the current gaming landscape. There’s titles like Dragon age Veilguard, Concord, Dustborn, Forspoken, Fintlock and others coming out these days that put heavy focus on inclusion/diversity over quality (as evidenced by poor sales numbers). It’s hard to then look at an upcoming game set in historial Japan that somehow features a black protagonist and not think that they’re trying to push some weirdo agenda rather than tell a cool story.
It seems you’re the one who’s focusing more on avoiding inclusivity than in if the games are good our not.
Every year, we have a LOT of bad games, some pure thrash. You only seem concerned about those who don’t conform to your seemingly low acceptance for diversity. Sure, Concord failed because a playable character was overweight. Not a mediocre hero shooter for 40 dollars when great ones are free. Veilguard has been positively received outside of 4 Chan.
And dustborn. The fact that to are dragging an indie game already aiming to a very specific demographic shows how little you understand that not every game is made for you.
I guess this is what being a closeted bigot looks like.
Indicators are showing that Dragon Age is selling just fine. And it’s not like they get to their planning meeting and ask, “Can we spend some more time on the game design? It’s got real problems,” only to be met with, “No, we’ve got to really focus on diversity this quarter.” They’re not related. While I hardly trust Ubisoft to wow audiences with a cool story, it’s not hard to imagine the related struggles that a foreigner and a woman might have to bond over in that setting.
The black samurai is literally a historical figure. What do you mean “it doesn’t make sense”?
I just think it’s bizarre to have a black dude protagonist in a historical japanese setting. I’ve read through the sources on Yasuke and I think it’s a stretch to say he was like a full fledged samurai. Especially given that the biggest proponent of that theory, Thomas Lockley, made some sketchy edits between the Japanese and English version of his book on him.
I just think it’s bizarre to have a black dude protagonist in a historical japanese setting.
Why? He is a historical figure. Why does a historical figure in his historical setting feel bizarre?
I’ve read through the sources on Yasuke and I think it’s a stretch to say he was like a full fledged samurai.
Potato potato. Why him being a “full fledged samurai” even matters? The series is known to take creative liberties with history.
Seriously ask yourself why having ONE SINGULAR black protagonist in a series where protagonists have so far been overwhelmingly white feels like “black people getting pushed into games”.
Because to me, it sounds like you have seen too many opinions of people getting outraged and because of that you internalized their views without asking yourself why they (and now you) feel the way they do.
Why? He is a historical figure. Why does a historical figure in his historical setting feel bizarre?
Why him being a “full fledged samurai” even matters?
This is just difference in opinion. For you it’s OK. I get that this series is only very vaguely based on history but this is a step too far for me.
Seriously ask yourself why having ONE SINGULAR black protagonist in a series where protagonists have so far been overwhelmingly white
Why MUST they make the main character in a 1580’s japanese setting black? The series hasn’t had a single asian protagonist. Couldn’t they have chosen a black history setting if this is what they wanted?
