PCGamer opened a forum that prohibits users from talking about guns, religion, sexuality, abortion, politics, economics (up: policy taken down)


Oct 26, 2017
This cuts both ways. It's a pretty privileged life if representation on character creators and diversity among video game voice actors, is one of the issues that gets yo riled up. Not that these aren't important, don't get me wrong. But it's definitely not gonna be on the radar as even remotely significant unless you're privileged enough to take a ton of lower levels on the Maslow scale for granted.

Does that give me the right to get exasperated here that you're myopically focusing on this kind of thing instead of discussing more pressing issues? No, because there's other spaces for those conversations. This is a space for these others. And PC Gamer suggested creating a space for yet others. Don't really see the harm in that as long as they moderate these rules in good faith.
Since when did "politics and social issues" mean only diversity and representation? You're looking for what you want to see here. Games are capable of tackling all political issues, including poverty and illness, just like films. I'm saying it's fine if you want to escape those thoughts, and plenty of people do right here on Era. You're free not to engage in any conversation you don't feel up to. But banning anyone for discussing the political/social aspect of video games is really bizarre, when so many games use them as central themes, and is clearly pandering to the vocal minority who get angry when they even see talk of politics online, let alone engage with it.


Oct 25, 2017
To those that are in support of this move, and arguing for spaces where "we can just talk about games" I'd ask, what's stopping you now?

This forum is one where a significant amount of political discourse around gaming occurs, but then the majority of what I see is the type of conversation you seem to desire. That of the more tangible elements of games such as mechanics, visuals or whatever. That all still occurs in great volume.

On a forum where political discourse is not banned, these threads of conversation interweave on discussions about a game. Conversations about Cyberpunk will include discussion about the representation of gender as well as those about if the shooting will feel good. One does not preclude the other.

The argument many are making is that the line being drawn is arbitrary. The overarching themes of a game can represent as significant a part of a game as the art style or the loot system. It's down to you which parts of that you personally engage with.

This new forum seems to draw a line in the sand saying "these parts of games cannot be discussed" likely in response to the current political climate, but it's essentially inhibiting conversation about the very same games.

Tl:dr - You can still engage in conversation about a game strictly based on the enjoyment of it without touching on GRAPES already, without those topics being outrightly outlawed. This move simply stifles any conversation about the wider gaming package that doesn't adhere to this arbitrary line.
People who are in support of this kind of move, the "Can we just talk about games?" crowd, simply don't want to see their favorite games/devs/studios get attacked with GRAPES.

It all comes down to corporate boot licking and fanboyism.