I'm all for criticizing lootboxes and predatory publisher practices, but the last few weeks have also made me wonder if the concerns of most gamers are basically just bourgeois politics, that organized movements and outcries are only activated and engaged when it concerns the games as products that are under siege, and not the other deplorable parts of the system, such as horrible working conditions of developers and hardware manufacturers, or the rampant misogyny, transphobia, and racism in gaming culture. This is not to say that people shouldn't be outraged by tax-evading multibillion companies putting lootboxes into their games to create more profits (I'm the first to say they should!), but that I wish the same level of outrage were present in other abhorrent aspects of the games industry and culture.
For example, you don't see the same level of outcry and action when the EA spouse letter appeared. You don't see review-bombing and social media campaigns when Rockstar was throwing their San Diego studio into the grinder when developing Red Dead Redemption. You don't see the social media campaigns when Team Bondi's management were crunching the workers for LA Noire. You don't see mass support of outspoken women who are harassed and terrorized in game culture. You don't see a mass backing of minority developers who are targeted by gamer reactionaries because they dare to have a person of color in their game. There is simply not a mass outcry and bottom-up 'controversy' when it comes to these mentioned issues, at least not to the same extent as we see with lootboxes.
The conclusion that I personally gather from the above is that a significant amount of gamers suddenly care about lootboxes because lootboxes affect the products gamers invest in. I understand that we take up such reactionary politics because we invest our wages into these things, but the whole 'consumer advocacy' seems to mostly be a relation to property and not necessarily a criticism of the reasons why lootboxes exist. I.e. being a "consumer advocate" is just another word for "property owner,", i.e. it's a politics for a bourgeoisie and we don't seem to grapple with the problems of the system if we simply only are vocal and supportive when it is affecting the products we buy and invest in.
(This also goes for media, such as journalists and Youtubers, who seem to be vocal and critical and taking a hard position in this topic, but not necessarily in the ones I listed.)
For example, you don't see the same level of outcry and action when the EA spouse letter appeared. You don't see review-bombing and social media campaigns when Rockstar was throwing their San Diego studio into the grinder when developing Red Dead Redemption. You don't see the social media campaigns when Team Bondi's management were crunching the workers for LA Noire. You don't see mass support of outspoken women who are harassed and terrorized in game culture. You don't see a mass backing of minority developers who are targeted by gamer reactionaries because they dare to have a person of color in their game. There is simply not a mass outcry and bottom-up 'controversy' when it comes to these mentioned issues, at least not to the same extent as we see with lootboxes.
The conclusion that I personally gather from the above is that a significant amount of gamers suddenly care about lootboxes because lootboxes affect the products gamers invest in. I understand that we take up such reactionary politics because we invest our wages into these things, but the whole 'consumer advocacy' seems to mostly be a relation to property and not necessarily a criticism of the reasons why lootboxes exist. I.e. being a "consumer advocate" is just another word for "property owner,", i.e. it's a politics for a bourgeoisie and we don't seem to grapple with the problems of the system if we simply only are vocal and supportive when it is affecting the products we buy and invest in.
(This also goes for media, such as journalists and Youtubers, who seem to be vocal and critical and taking a hard position in this topic, but not necessarily in the ones I listed.)