Is it okay to support developers with ideologies you don’t support?

I try to avoid problematic games or games by problematic developers, but usually I'll learn about it too late. For instance, if I had known Persona 5 would treats its female and LGBT characters, I wouldn't have bothered, but I was already 30 hours deep into it by then. I won't look down on other people that don't care or reluctantly accept that froggy bits are part of a package, but I do take issue when people start defending its inclusion.

A personal boycott I try to uphold is not buying games that uses real-world weapon brands. When I realised that weapon names would probably have to be licensed, it just made me uneasy with where my money was going. I am really ignorant on the matter though, so it can be difficult to not support these games.

HazySaiyan said:

It's up to you, everybody has a different scale of what they can and can't tolerate.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Good answer.

IMO it's okay since the ideology of the developer dont transpass for the game
Seems familiar to the case of not watch some movies that have persons in the cast which is involved with sexual abuse.

Lopez said:

The dev literally follows Nazis

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Earlier when you said he literally follows Nazis, I asked for evidence and I'll ask again.

The closest thing people got to answering it was that @POTUS, Colin Moriarty and he follows "some Irish Nazi". I certainly don't think following Colin Moriarty (who is not a Nazi) and the President of the United States is at all controversial. As for the Irish Nazi thing, I'll believe it when I see it.

Yes. If it's not a radical ideology.

Even if a game developer commit mass genocide, I'd still play their game if it was enjoyable.

It's not like me not playing it would make any difference *Shrug*

spineduke said:

We got some quality folk here on Era

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Obviously it's hyperbole.

I've got bad news for everyone. At least one person who worked on your favorite game is a piece of shit. You will end up boycotting everything if you have a problem with that.

The problem with Kingdom Come Deliverance is that the head developer's Nazi tendencies (which would be enough for me to avoid the game tbh) have a clear influence on the game. He very proudly states that there are no non-whites in the game and attributes it to "historic accuracy", which is complete and utter bullshit. This is a very clear difference to something like The Witcher 3, where the lack of Non-Whites can and was attributed, by the developers themselves, not to intention, but lack of foresight and by the focus on different issues.


Meanwhile, Daniel Vávra wears the shirt of a notorious Metal-Band lead by a convicted murderer who also planned on blowing up a leftist meeting ground in Oslo and who proudly called himself a White Supremacist, but now "only" sees himself as a racist during gamescom and Interviews, proclaims any arguments and facts that point to Non-Whites actually already existing in Europe during the Middle Ages als leftist SJW propaganda and builds his game as some sort of glorified white ethno-state, that HE argues is actually built on facts, not racist ideologies. His outspoken support of things like GamerGate really are among the smaller problems with this dude.

I mad this point on Twitter a few days ago: Just imagine a director would advertise a Nazi band, proudly and openly exclude any Non-White actors and justify this with disproven "facts". The uproar would be gigantic and rightfully so, even in an industry as White-Male-dominated as Hollywood.

Life is far too short to be too worried about it.

For me, if I were to avoid buying things because I had disagreements with views of the creator I would be living a very poor quality life.

I understand some of you guys get upset about it and choose not to buy a game cause of the dev, that's fine and it's your life.

Don't think there is really much more to be said that has not been said already.

quincognito said:

This doesn't seem like a particularly good point at all given that the notion of Beethoven having some African descent is one that's been widely known of and discussed for decades, and MedivalPOC themselves are quite explicit that they're only aiming to showcase the existence of competing theories, not to specifically assert that the truth is that Beethoven was black.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

The idea that Beethoven might have been black is nonsense, no matter how "widely known" or "discussed" amongst a handful of American non-historians it is.

MedievalPOC entertains the nonsense with the old "I'm not saying it's aliens, but it's aliens" routine, c'mon. She not only shows "evidence" such as a drawing a few comments but even links to a "recommended rebuttal source" called "Beethoven as a black composer". If he didn't agree with this nonsense, she could have easily said "no, Beethoven was white" and dimiss the arguments but she didn't.

She has also argued that other historical characters were black no matter how nonsensical it might be, like Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. She also said that Queen Urraca was Muslim which is...erm, beyond absurd. Beethoven is not the only example.

She has also shared absolute nonsense theories like this one:

"the egyptians knew that if they put their boats in front of the summer storm winds it'd blow them right across the sea to the Americas and they shared that with the greeks."

Seriously: http://medievalpoc.tumblr.com/post/77924407975/doublehamburgerjack-frantzfandom

Her arguments on other areas have also been on shaky ground. Her blog made the rounds around far before the Kingdom Come controversy and she has been repeatedly criticized for her bad grasp on history. Which is no wonder, as she doesn't seem to have any actual training on the subject.

For me that's more than enough to not trust her as a historical source.

RabbidPeach said:

Obviously it's hyperbole.

I've got bad news for everyone. At least one person who worked on your favorite game is a piece of shit. You will end up boycotting everything if you have a problem with that.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

That's one hell of a strawman.

There is a big gap between not buying something when the people running it are shit versus someone who happens to work on a project being shit.

There is a big gap between buying something that directly profits or promotes a shit agenda versus something that has no agenda and where the proceeds will simply be used to make more.

As I said earlier, each Assassin's Creed game is made by somewhere close to 1000 people. It is a certainty that there are some shit people in that group. None of them are substantially empowered by you buying the game. Meanwhile you're directly supporting and promoting Vavra by buying his game made by his studio.

And the other example I gave: You can buy a Dragon Quest game without giving Sugiyama meaningful support to spread his hateful revision of history because his proceeds from the average DQ project is pretty minimal. When you specifically buy the soundtracks or go to DQ symphonic concerts you're then actively supporting him directly and helping him spread that hateful message.

See the difference? It's pretty fucking big. Add that there are more good games released in the average year than any one human could reasonably play if they literally did nothing else and it becomes pretty easy to not buy products that will directly fuel hateful propaganda.

But sure, mah vidya gaems!

DaciaJC said:

None of these pictorial examples actually depict a person of color who lived in Bohemia. Queen of Sheba: Biblical figure thought to have lived in the Arabian Peninsula. Saint Maurice: born in Egypt, served in Gaul (France) in the 3rd century. Saint Jerome: born in what is modern-day Croatia, practiced asceticism in the Syrian desert for a number of years, where by his own account his "squalid skin became as black as an Ethiopian's." I suspect this was the inspiration for Theodoric's painting, similar to another representation of Jerome as seen below.

And so on. Where is the evidence that people of color (e.g. Africans) would have inhabited or otherwise been seen in large enough numbers in a small, rural sector of Bohemia to warrant their inclusion in Kingdom Come?



And none of these resources actually provide a demographic justification for including certain ethnicities in a game focusing on a small strip of land in which there would have been virtually zero of said peoples in the represented time period. No one here, nor Vavra and his team, is arguing that medieval Europe was exclusively white, but rural Bohemia is not England is not Hispania is not the Kingdom of Sicily.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

When someone is painted in that particular area it does not mean that the person is from there - it just means

Also, you may not realize this, but it is possible for people to travel from country to country. There's a reason why I posted all those medieval studies that emphasize the way that North Africa, the Middle East, and Europe were trading and traveling. They've been doing that for so long that it's practically neglectful to state that it is entirely impossible for a brown or a black person to somehow show up in a Eastern European area like Bohemia.

But keep defending the arbitrary reasons for an alt-righter to build his all-White fantasy and thus contribute to the white-washing of medieval times that white nationalists love so dearly. I'm sure Kingdom Come will get the official Stormfront seal of approval and people will fall for the "but it's historically accurate to be all-White!"

Terrell said:

For this not to be a post that contradicts itself, you'd have to assume that racists and bigots are born racists and bigots and not formed by things like the propaganda that these groups fund, or that well-meaning people can't be swayed to hold racist or bigoted ideas by said propaganda. Which is... wow.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Full Stop

No...all bigots and misogynists learn to be racist and misogynist from people they love and trust at home by word of mouth and by action, that's the only way a fundamentally flawed ideology can be so deeply seeded in some peoples' subconscious minds that it takes years and years, if ever, for them to logically and rationally question it. There's no externally constructed propaganda that's going to do that. It's also the only way misogyny and bigotry can last generation after generation irrespective to the changes in society and the changing modes of communication. Whether those values are subtle and nuanced or blatant and binary and how much is employed in the persons day to day lives at some point is all that's different.

Those twisted values being weaponized in the form of propaganda come later, often and in many different forms, different organized groups ( i.e: the "alt right") they are designed to evade authority for the purpose of coalescing the largest groups of essentially easily radicalized "sleeping" individuals together as discreetly as possible.

By both eliminating propaganda, as much as possible, and not financially supporting those people that organize and empower like-minded individuals for the purpose of maintaining social inequity behind closed doors without propaganda you essentially force those people to collectively bash their head against a brick wall until they either consider questioning their ideology or retreat to ever smaller and insignificant circles of outsiders. That's the plan most of us are into.

Terrell said:

Let me ask you this, then: would you give money to a Patreon for Milo Yiannopolous to create content that interested you, so long as it was devoid of his politics?

Also, you can't act on information you don't have, so it's a bit unfair of you to make your second statement.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

So it's wrong to say that developers are normal people or it's wrong to say that's not fair to condemn everyone for the sins of one?

What kind of insane idea of developers do you have? Do you think they are sort of genius saints? They are normal people like everyone else, developers can obviously be good people but developers can also be assholes, corrupted, incompetent and so on, and the same applies to publishers, journalists, bloggers, youtubers, SCIENTISTS, artists, athletes and every other category you can think of, you can't really be so naive(and i'm being good) to think otherwise.

I don't know the guy you are talking about but do you want to know who wouldn't i fund? That massive hypocrite of Bono Vox, he talks so much about third world's poors, debts, hunger etc but then he was caught 2 times hiding money, the so called "fans" should punish him hard but we(especially gamers) know very well how hypocrite "fans" can be.

Think of Weinstein, he and everyone who was informed has to pay hard, but boycotting his movies means damaging the hundreds of innocent people who worked hard and seriously for those movies. Hundreds of innocent people should pay for a single one? That's not fair for me, he and only him has to pay.

Funding a single person is different from funding a group of people where there's a bad apple, i wouldn't fund myself a bad person, but i wouldn't let the sins of a bad person affect innocent good people. If you don't like a person among a team of developers just say it on its social network, if others agree with you they will do the same and maybe the team will take action against him/her, there are many ways to punish only those who deserve it.

I WAS considering getting Kingdom Come, but not any more.

It depends. If a dev does some good as well as some bad, I can support. Stardock falls into this category. I can understand folks not wanting to support said company for those beliefs.
Not everyone is going to march in lockstep.

It does get annoying when every game from a controversial developer on here turns into a shitstorm about those beliefs or something that allegedly happened years ago. Such things should go in a separate thread.

JustSomeone said:

I mean, 99% of the people here play japanese games, and the japanese society is extremely misogynistic.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

It's interesting that you mention this since they're generally anti-black/anti-POC as well. This is the reason I don't buy Capcom games and the reason more than a few others don't as well. I often deliberate on buying any Japanese games for this reason. Ominusha is the only game I might cave for and even then it's more likely then not I would get it used.

CaviarMeths said:

Gotta let your own moral compass decide on that one. If you can separate the art from the artist, go ahead and have fun. If you can't, then no shame in skipping it either.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Should have been first post.

The main issue I see with the question asked is twofold. One is that you should define what you see as "ideology". People tend to use very different definition of what an ideology is. The other one is that it's sometimes very hard to see the actual ideology of the author(s) as in, you know, be in their head.

Like take Clint Eastwood, he's a well known Republican supporter, yet many of his movies can easily be interpreted as totally not aligned with the usual Republican themes. So what is he really?

And that's an example when you have an actual spoken alignment. What do you do if you suspect but don't know? What's the actual meaning of the message of the game? I could easily argue that some of the Call of Duty under-themes are actually pretty anti-militaristic. Also I didn't get the memo so maybe this is well known but I don't remember IW aligning themselves officially. Therefore how do you know what they really think?

So as CaviarMeths said: "Gotta let your own moral compass decide on that one."

Sure. One shitty lead should not excuse the hard work of the others working with or underneath him/her. See also the Witchfire thread.

nillansan said:

So the notion of voting with your wallet is a completely useless practice to adopt?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

In most cases it is. Things only catch up steam when everyone is getting disadvantages, like Battlefront's lootbox spectacle. That took off because it hits everyone. One dev being shitty? That just hits those who are aware that he is shitty or let that play an influence on their decisions to purchase a game or not.

nillansan said:

Really damning how this thread somehow lacks the presence of a ban hammer that does more than just give out slaps on wrists.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Baseless complaining about the moderation is also subject to getting a slap on the wrist. If you feel this needs extra attention, then you should have been in the thread of yesterday where you could have argued your complaint. Or report the post.

Yes because at the end of the day I'm not doing to take the time to make sure every company/dev I buy from is squeaky clean nor do I actually care to a certain point.

Yea you feel real good to say "I'm not buying Action game #274121 because it is made by XYZ company who do bad thing!! Now excuse me while I buy my iPhone X that was in part made by slave labor."

As the thread already showed, it depends from person to person. :P
For me, it depends just if that ideology is not in the game itself.

I'm acquiring a product that is the sum of the game developing skills of a person or a team. At that point, it doesn't really matter what those developers do in their spare time. They might be supporting some political agenda that I strongly dislike, or they might be doing something less political that I completely disapprove, like being a jerk to their moms.

If the game will make me punch my mom during gameplay or something, I'll simply not buy (or ask for a refund). If the developer was kind enough to not force those 'bad principles' and ideologies into the game, I'm ok with the game. I won't support him on anything that he does on his spare time, because my relationship with the developer is purely developer-player. Buying the game doesn't mean that you'll become his friend or that he'll become part of your family: when I buy a game, the only thing I care is the game developer persona of that individual or team.

Well depends. If it's some low person who stirred some shit then no. If its someone or higher ups who can effect many things going forward then no

Redneckerz said:

In most cases it is. Things only catch up steam when everyone is getting disadvantages, like Battlefront's lootbox spectacle. That took off because it hits everyone. One dev being shitty? That just hits those who are aware that he is shitty or let that play an influence on their decisions to purchase a game or not.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I already elaborated on my stance regarding boycotts and other similar practices.

Redneckerz said:

Baseless complaining about the moderation is also subject to getting a slap on the wrist. If you feel this needs extra attention, then you should have been in the thread of yesterday where you could have argued your complaint. Or report the post.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I already acknowledged the moderator's statement on the matter.

SilentRob said:

The problem with Kingdom Come Deliverance is that the head developer's Nazi tendencies (which would be enough for me to avoid the game tbh) have a clear influence on the game. He very proudly states that there are no non-whites in the game and attributes it to "historic accuracy", which is complete and utter bullshit. This is a very clear difference to something like The Witcher 3, where the lack of Non-Whites can and was attributes, by the developers themselves, not to intention, but lack of foresight and by the focus on different issues.

Meanwhile, Daniel Vávra wears the shirt of a notorious Metal-Band lead by a convicted murderer who also planned on blowing up a leftist meeting ground in Oslo and who proudly called himself a White Supremacist, but now "only" sees himself as a racist during gamescom and Interviews, proclaims any arguments and facts that point to Non-Whites actually already existing in Europe during the Middle Ages als leftist SJW propaganda and builds his game as some sort of glorified white ethno-state, that HE argues is actually built on facts, not racist ideologies. His outspoken support of things like GamerGate really are among the smaller problems with this dude.

I mad this point on Twitter a few days ago: Just imagine a director would advertise for a Nazi band, proudly and openly exclude any Non-White actors and justify this with disproven "facts". The uproar would be gigantic and rightfully so, even in an industry as White-Male-dominated as Hollywood.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This post, I agree with. When another historian provided evidence that shows black potrayal in medievil art, literature to show they were present in Europe at the time, his twitter followers attacked the guy and his website, made screenshots of the abuse and laughed about it on 4Chan.
Whether or not that person was correct, Vavra didnt stop them, or ask them to stop, he however reviled that they made him out to be a hero standing up against the "SJW" 's.

As a person of color, living in a country where I've seen this racist pack of wolves attack happen on the street (gang of white people attacking a single black individual), I made a decision to NOT support this game.
EVER.

Each individual has their own line on what goes too far. I was interested in Kingdom Come, but not enough that the dev's ideology detracts me enough to stay away.

Hey Lime im here to deliver m1chys message. He says that he's sorry

Drek said:

That's one hell of a strawman.

There is a big gap between not buying something when the people running it are shit versus someone who happens to work on a project being shit.

There is a big gap between buying something that directly profits or promotes a shit agenda versus something that has no agenda and where the proceeds will simply be used to make more.

As I said earlier, each Assassin's Creed game is made by somewhere close to 1000 people. It is a certainty that there are some shit people in that group. None of them are substantially empowered by you buying the game. Meanwhile you're directly supporting and promoting Vavra by buying his game made by his studio.

And the other example I gave: You can buy a Dragon Quest game without giving Sugiyama meaningful support to spread his hateful revision of history because his proceeds from the average DQ project is pretty minimal. When you specifically buy the soundtracks or go to DQ symphonic concerts you're then actively supporting him directly and helping him spread that hateful message.

See the difference? It's pretty fucking big. Add that there are more good games released in the average year than any one human could reasonably play if they literally did nothing else and it becomes pretty easy to not buy products that will directly fuel hateful propaganda.

But sure, mah vidya gaems!

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Ok

Can you point me to a similar game to kingdom come available on ps4?

Sir Guts said:

Hey Lime im here to deliver m1chys message. He says that he's sorry

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Wow that's very sweet of them, thank you, but they have absolutely no reason to apologize. I hope they're all right?

I see no problem with it as long as their creations don't reflect ideologies you despise.

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that people saying that they have no problem in buying a game from a developers that have ideologies that they don't support but yet had no qualm what so ever in jumping ship from GAF to ERA?

I guess the buck stops when video game is attached to the product. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You can support whatever you want. Ultimately it's your money and your responsibility to decide what you can and cannot deal with.

Now me personally? If a publisher wants me to buy their game then the message and branding by them and the devs needs to be free of pieces of shit. You couodn't buy a product ever if you expect total moral purity. But I do expect pieces of shit to shut the fuck up and be pieces of shit on their own private time.

If its easy for me to associate your game with racism or misogyny then I'm not buying it. So its on the devs and publishers to snuff that shit out

Mr-Joker said:

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that people saying that they have no problem in buying a game from a developers that have ideologies that they don't support but yet had no qualm what so ever in jumping ship from GAF to ERA?

I guess the buck stops when video game is attached to the product. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Eh, after the controversy the site died. A community that big going under, you'll have people jump ship for dozens of reasons. The point you're making is extremely presumptious.

Finally a perfect time to use this image

I think this is something that you have to use your own judgement on. It's impossible to boycott everything that has any relation to something that you like, because absolutely everything has ties to things that you don't like. So what's left is to choose what you do want to avoid.

Personally, I don't avoid products if the odd person that worked on them had horrible views, because every company has their share of assholes, whether it's a higher-up or just some guy working in the trenches. Doesn't make sense to avoid a product that you like just because Random Douche from Engineering is an asshole, because there are plenty of normal people who also worked hard on that product and they don't deserve to be punished for that.

On the other hand, if the company adheres to a horrible view as its platform or as a group, then I'd try to avoid it. Places like those dickheads who were trying to make that dirty Chinese restaurant game, or that edgelord mass killing simulator game. I'd try to avoid those because that's not just a random guy being a douche, but obviously a group of people who all support and put work towards some cause that I hate. Same goes for if the owner is vocal about that, because the owner is the face of the company and holds a lot of power over where its revenue goes.

Lime said:

When someone is painted in that particular area it does not mean that the person is from there - it just means

Also, you may not realize this, but it is possible for people to travel from country to country. There's a reason why I posted all those medieval studies that emphasize the way that North Africa, the Middle East, and Europe were trading and traveling. They've been doing that for so long that it's practically neglectful to state that it is entirely impossible for a brown or a black person to somehow show up in a Eastern European area like Bohemia.

But keep defending the arbitrary reasons for an alt-righter to build his all-White fantasy and thus contribute to the white-washing of medieval times that white nationalists love so dearly. I'm sure Kingdom Come will get the official Stormfront seal of approval and people will fall for the "but it's historically accurate to be all-White!"

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

"When someone is painted in that particular area it does not mean that the person is from there - it just means"

You don't seem to have finished your sentence, so I'll attempt to do so: it just means that the painter was exposed in some way to the subject of his piece - maybe through folklore, popular legends, tales from travelers, or contemporary historical accounts; maybe through the works of other artists; maybe through dreams or visions; or yes, maybe through direct interaction with the subject. It could be, in fact, that the artist happened to be the court painter for Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV, a position which would have allowed Master Theodoric vastly more opportunities for observation of other ethnicities, such as those represented in delegations from African kingdoms, than the common peasant living in a rural village. These paintings in no way imply that there were people of similar features actually living in the area, there is no logical correlation to reach that conclusion. Never mind that the subject of Theodoric's work, St. Jerome, wasn't actually a black person, as mistakenly thought by the author of that medievalpoc blog.

And I don't know if this was out of ignorance or done purposefully, but you completely glossed over the fact that in my post I stressed that the game takes place in a small piece of Bohemian countryside. Not in a major urban center like Prague or a port or an important trading hub, in which case the inclusion of people of color, I think, would have been reasonable. No, in a nine square-kilometer section of land encompassing a couple of villages, a castle, and a monastery. I'm not saying there weren't any people of color in medieval Europe or Bohemia specifically. In fact, I'm not even arguing that there absolutely were no such people living or traveling in the countryside as depicted in the game. No one can make that claim with certainty. All I'm saying is that the likelihood of a person like Henry in Kingdom Come actually encountering an African or such would have been so exceedingly small that Warhorse's decision not to include them in the game seems perfectly justifiable from an historical point of view.

ArmsofSleep said:

Finally a perfect time to use this image

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This image is awful because it puts across the idea that either you accept nothing is ethical or you boycott capitalism altogether. This is simply not true, and a massive oversimplification of the real world. In addition, boycotting capitalism in its entirety while living in a capitalist society pretty much means starvation and death, so that's not a practical option for anyone. The only option for those who care about morals is to fight any small fights they care about within that umbrella and they are completely within their rights to do so.

Seriously, I know that mass consumption fuels the capitalist model which inevitably leads to exploitation. That's a bigger fight that can be had separately and doesn't invalidate any smaller fights people can actually reasonably make.

It's the same extreme shit people pull with anti-capitalist protestors. "Your opinions on capitalism are invalid because you are enjoying a cup of coffee you bought!". No, they needed a fucking drink. (This actually happened in the UK which was why it was on my mind. I know it's a tangent).

it's down to the consumer. some people don't care about the politics or social issues surrounding anything in their lives, let alone their hobbies... they don't care how things are made as long as they like the final outcome. they just roll with the punches and accept anything that's thrown at them. and admittedly, it would be a simpler way to look at things, albeit a short sighted one.

personally i struggle with supporting them. i struggle to support anyone with toxic attitudes, and that extends to developers and publishers. does that mean i'm perfect? no. i still buy modern electrical goods despite them being made in places like foxconn with less than ideal working conditions. i still buy some clothes that are likely made in sweatshops...but i do vote with my wallet as much as i can. if i hear about some chain restaurant being owned by some bigot i won't eat there. if i hear about some misogynistic ass hole being the owner of a development studio, i'll stop buying their games. i would never buy a game fronted by Brendan McNamara for instance due to the way he ran team bondi.

as far as i'm concerned there are almost always alternatives to be found, especially in the world of games and entertainment, so it's not a difficult sacrifice to make in an attempt to send a message. is me doing so going to achieve anything? maybe not. and if it does is it fair to potentially destroy a company or a games success based on one person's poor behavior or beliefs? it's a tough question that i can't answer and i don't think anyone can. you just gotta go with your gut.

Whatever you do people will judge, so be true to yourself I guess ....

Nappael said:

This image is awful because it puts across the idea that either you accept nothing is ethical or you boycott capitalism altogether. This is simply not true, and a massive oversimplification of the real world. In addition, boycotting capitalism in its entirety while living in a capitalist society pretty much means starvation and death, so that's not a practical option for anyone. The only option for those who care about morals is to fight any small fights they care about within that umbrella and they are completely within their rights to do so.

It's the same extreme shit people pull with anti-capitalist protestors. "Your opinions on capitalism are invalid because you are enjoying a cup of coffee you bought!". No, they needed a fucking drink. (This actually happened in the UK which was why it was on my mind).

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Can't get down to business on this since it's an unrelated topic but that phrase is not about accepting that all purchases under capitalism are unethical/boycotting capitalism, even though it is often read that way. It is meant to paint the point that capitalism inherently breeds and protects exploitative systems. No one is saying "well you have to stop buying all games now!", it actually says the opposite of that. Basically that you can't judge people for finding simple pleasures in a very harsh world, because most of modern societies are put into positions where you have to be standing on the shoulders of someone else just to survive.

SilentRob said:

He very proudly states that there are no non-whites in the game and attributes it to "historic accuracy", which is complete and utter bullshit.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Is it? I'm no expert, but know this and that about history of Europe. Do we have any solid evidence of widespread presence of non-whites in central Europe in the Middle Ages, more particular at the beginning of the 15th century? In Western Europe it was the time of the final stages of reconquista and fight to push back Moors from the Iberian Peninsula.

SilentRob said:

This is a very clear difference to something like The Witcher 3, where the lack of Non-Whites can and was attributed, by the developers themselves, not to intention, but lack of foresight and by the focus on different issues.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

This is how Andrzej Sapkowski depicts the reality of Witcher's world. In his books, even the latest one, there are no people of colour.

I'm wondering whether some people want to see some diversity for the sake of it. Like in Battlefield 1, where DICE (or EA) decided to emphasise presence of black American soldiers in the conflict, even though they arrived in Europe in the final months of the war (December 1917) and in relatively small number (about 40,000; for comparison, during the whole conflict there were over 70 mln people fighting around the world).

nillansan said:

I already elaborated on my stance regarding boycotts and other similar practices.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I think i saw, but not too sure. I was speaking more in a general sense, you could elaborate on it.

It's certainly an interesting question, and definitely one with no completely right answers - there's something to be said for supporting a work that isn't perfect for possibly malicious reasons, but does enough good that you give the devs the benefit of the doubt and hope they'll improve in the future. Also, death of the author, etc., so if you feel the work manages to separate itself from the people who made it, it might still be worth playing. That being said though, from what I've read in this thread Kingdom Come Deliverance is an extreme case that I'd feel very uncomfortable supporting. Maybe I'd try and find a used copy if I was really interested in the game itself.

The number of posts in the thread demonstrates that there is no "one right answer" to this question. It depends on dozens of factors.

Personally, I have never boycotted a game because someone on the development team held a belief system I found stupid or ignorant. I just take it for granted that many developers have belief systems I find stupid/ignorant ... just as many of the companies I buy food from have practices that are repugnant, and many of the companies I buy stuff from have dickhead management. I can't go around monitoring the belief systems and practices of every company I buy stuff from. When I buy eggs (about once a year), I'll buy a carton marked "cage free," but that's about all the energy I expend on monitoring this sort of thing.

But that's me. Obviously, others feel more incensed about this particular issue, and that's fine.

RabbidPeach said:

Obviously it's hyperbole.

I've got bad news for everyone. At least one person who worked on your favorite game is a piece of shit. You will end up boycotting everything if you have a problem with that.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Again, you can't act on information you don't have. I'm sure you're correct, but I have no way of knowing, so if I don't have any information about those people to make that decision, there's this thing called "benefit of the doubt".

2+2=5 said:

So it's wrong to say that developers are normal people or it's wrong to say that's not fair to condemn everyone for the sins of one?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Not buying a product to keep from funding a shithead does not equate to "condemnation". I don't buy hundreds of products every day, for a variety of reasons. Would you consider me to be condemning those people to suffering by not buying the things all those people manufactured because I don't want to for a simpler reason like "they don't make it in a color I want"?

2+2=5 said:

What kind of insane idea of developers do you have? Do you think they are sort of genius saints? They are normal people like everyone else, developers can obviously be good people but developers can also be assholes, corrupted, incompetent and so on, and the same applies to publishers, journalists, bloggers, youtubers, SCIENTISTS, artists, athletes and every other category you can think of, you can't really be so naive(and i'm being good) to think otherwise.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

I can only act on the information I have. For example, I don't and couldn't fault people who don't know the situation around a game like Kingdom Come and make a purchase decision without all the facts. Again, you can't act on what you don't know.

2+2=5 said:

I don't know the guy you are talking about but do you want to know who wouldn't i fund? That massive hypocrite of Bono Vox, he talks so much about third world's poors, debts, hunger etc but then he was caught 2 times hiding money, the so called "fans" should punish him hard but we(especially gamers) know very well how hypocrite "fans" can be.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Milo Yiannopolous is one of the major inciters/beneficiaries of Gamergate, made a career of advocating for alt-right causes (including neo-Nazi and white supremacy movements), is a known and self-admitted "SJW"-agitator and even the alt-right mostly disavows him now after saying that adults having sex with 13-year-olds can be both consensual and positively transformative for the child.

Now you know.

2+2=5 said:

Think of Weinstein, he and everyone who was informed has to pay hard, but boycotting his movies means damaging the hundreds of innocent people who worked hard and seriously for those movies. Hundreds of innocent people should pay for a single one? That's not fair for me, he and only him has to pay.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Why would you or anyone else do that at this point? Harvey Weinstein was fired from his company, pushed out by those innocent people you speak of. The problematic person was removed from the equation.

2+2=5 said:

Funding a single person is different from funding a group of people where there's a bad apple, i wouldn't fund myself a bad person, but i wouldn't let the sins of a bad person affect innocent good people. If you don't like a person among a team of developers just say it on its social network, if others agree with you they will do the same and maybe the team will take action against him/her, there are many ways to punish only those who deserve it.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Isn't what you recommend is exactly what people are doing here? The game isn't released, people are making a lot of noise to say, if something doesn't change, the game won't be a purchase they make.

If they're not a huge number of people, they get to feel good in their decision but it barely makes a dent in the fortunes of the developer.
If they are a large portion of the buying public, these "good guy" developers you mention have an opportunity to do right about this, unless their thinking is aligned with the "bad guy".

I... see no fault in this logic.

SliceSabre said:

Yes because at the end of the day I'm not doing to take the time to make sure every company/dev I buy from is squeaky clean nor do I actually care to a certain point.

Yea you feel real good to say "I'm not buying Action game #274121 because it is made by XYZ company who do bad thing!! Now excuse me while I buy my iPhone X that was in part made by slave labor."

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

ArmsofSleep said:

Finally a perfect time to use this image

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Likening a single entertainment product to consumer electronics that are impossible to escape the ramifications of because every manufacturer uses slave labor is disingenuous and you know it. Because if every developer was KNOWABLY guilty of these same ideas and behaviours, maybe you'd have a point. MAYBE. But until then, it's a strawman argument at its finest.

Really up to you on this one OP. I tend to not support devs/artists with ideologies I vehemently disagree with. There's also a ton of other stuff I can spend my time watching/doing/playing though, so it's not a huge loss.

Terrell said:

Likening a single entertainment product to consumer electronics that are impossible to escape the ramifications of because every manufacturer uses slave labor is disingenuous and you know it. Because if every developer was KNOWABLY guilty of these same ideas and behaviours, maybe you'd have a point. MAYBE. But until then, it's a strawman argument at its finest.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Should read my other post about this in this thread. The common interpretation of that phrase is missing the point entirely.

SilentRob said:

The problem with Kingdom Come Deliverance is that the head developer's Nazi tendencies (which would be enough for me to avoid the game tbh) have a clear influence on the game. He very proudly states that there are no non-whites in the game and attributes it to "historic accuracy", which is complete and utter bullshit. This is a very clear difference to something like The Witcher 3, where the lack of Non-Whites can and was attributed, by the developers themselves, not to intention, but lack of foresight and by the focus on different issues.

Meanwhile, Daniel Vávra wears the shirt of a notorious Metal-Band lead by a convicted murderer who also planned on blowing up a leftist meeting ground in Oslo and who proudly called himself a White Supremacist, but now "only" sees himself as a racist during gamescom and Interviews, proclaims any arguments and facts that point to Non-Whites actually already existing in Europe during the Middle Ages als leftist SJW propaganda and builds his game as some sort of glorified white ethno-state, that HE argues is actually built on facts, not racist ideologies. His outspoken support of things like GamerGate really are among the smaller problems with this dude.

I mad this point on Twitter a few days ago: Just imagine a director would advertise a Nazi band, proudly and openly exclude any Non-White actors and justify this with disproven "facts". The uproar would be gigantic and rightfully so, even in an industry as White-Male-dominated as Hollywood.

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

as for this guy...i wouldn't be comfortable giving money to him, it wouldn't matter if he was low or high within the company, if i buy that game i'm supporting him, and that's a no-go for me.

i think you need to know about something to act on it though. i keep seeing people saying something along the lines of "you'd have to boycott every company if you don't like unethical work practices within gaming" but that's a hell of a statement and you're immediately assuming the worst of everyone.

i mean, take the 900 AC devs. are they all saints? statistically it's unlikely... in those sorts of numbers i'd imagine there could be anything from wife beaters and rapists to pedophiles...but i'm not going to boycott them on that mere assumption. we need evidence to show someones an asshole to punish them for being one. sometimes they slip through the cracks and in hindsight you end up regretting buying games made by shitty people (Doug TenNapel and Earthworm Jim for instance) sometimes you find out before hand and you can act accordingly. but you need that knowledge to make that call.

Lime said:

Wow that's very sweet of them, thank you, but they have absolutely no reason to apologize. I hope they're all right?

Click to expand...

Click to shrink...

Because he got banned for a week so I offered him to deliver any message he have for you.

Gonna be honest. IDGAF. If I look hard enough, every thing I use, consume, buy is dripping with controversial actions from controversial people. Human beings are fucked up.

But that's the thing. IF I look hard enough. Ignorance is bliss.

What I'm not doing is boycotting something because it's twitter trendy with my social group.

Now that being said, if I feel personally insulted by a developer, I'm not going to enjoy playing his or her game so I won't.

If I am informed that the money of my purchase will be used to directly fund harm towards people/animals, either physical and/or mentally, then I will not buy the game, but I don't have the time to thoroughly research the money trail of each game to see if the cash is being ethically used.

I mean, ignorance could be bliss. If you found out the developers of a game were a bunch of neo-nazi's, but all the money made from the game goes to a cancer-charity and the developers provided the proof that this is being done... I don't know...