Actually I can say that. The people who play the games (and the people who watch the games being played) are not the same as the industry who creates the games.
The Guardian - How video games are fuelling the rise of the far right
- Thread starter purseowner
- Start date
Actually I can say that. The people who play the games (and the people who watch the games being played) are not the same as the industry who creates the games.
Kafka trap is "alt-right"? It's a word for an intellectually dishonest way to argue.
So what about:
Assassin's Creed unable to make a female player model
"Kekistan" item in Destiny
Female character models in a lot of games that draw huge criticsms
Link CANNOT be a girl
Princess Peach is always helpless
The numerous issues brought up by Anita Sarkesian
Developers are mostly men who don't entertain other perspectives
I could go on but those are easily highlighted from my memory. Like, you're deluding yourself if you think the game development is great for everyone and it has a good track record with representation and good representation at that. Like, bikini armor isn't just in 1 game.
Used dishonestly by alt-right folks like A Voice for Men and yourself. I have no doubt you feel differently, from inside your bubble.
Do I need to google Princess Peach for you to prove how wrong this claim is? This wasn't true even in the 1980s.
You have a very shallow understanding of the video game industry.
Assassin's Creed unable to make a female player model - For a game that was well into production, the way this was communicated was weak. They made a female character for the follow-up game.
"Kekistan" item in Destiny - This one COULD have been intentional, but it likely wasn't.
Female character models in a lot of games that draw huge criticsms - subjective.
Link CANNOT be a girl - if Nintendo doesn't want to make Link a girl, that's their choice.
Princess Peach is always helpless - Not always.
The numerous issues brought up by Anita Sarkesian - Some good some bad, but all subjective.
Developers are mostly men - That's changing.
Did I use it dishonestly there? And what exactly are you accusing me of?
Yeah. Ubisoft added female models after the shit mountain they got.
Criticism of female models by women is subjective? Hmmmm
Link is confirmed based off weird ass logic even though he is reincarnated. Also, you should read the logic they put forth. Makes you reaaaaally wonder.
Princess Peach is mostly helpless. Is that better?
Some good. Some bad. All subjective. Hmmm...
Like, you are going to great lengths to defend an industry with numerous social and cultural problems. Like, at a certain point you gotta ask, "why are these criticisms always brought up?"
Kek in Destiny wasn't intentional and that GAF thread was a complete embarrassment and overreaction.
Even when it was explained by Bungie we had conspiracy theories and calling them liars.
Even when it was explained by Bungie we had conspiracy theories and calling them liars.
Yeah. Ubisoft added female models after the shit mountain they got. - Which, IMO they shouldn't have to do if they don't want to.
Criticism of female models by women is subjective? Hmmmm - Hmmmm what?
Link is confirmed based off weird ass logic even though he is reincarnated. Also, you should read the logic they put forth. Makes you reaaaaally wonder. - Doesn't matter, it's their decision.
Princess Peach is mostly helpless. Is that better? - Yes, kinda.
Some good. Some bad. All subjective. Hmmm... Hmmm what?
Like, you are going to great lengths to defend an industry with numerous social and cultural problems. Like, at a certain point you gotta ask, "why are these criticisms always brought up?" - I'm defending an industry that I know better than you about.
That reads to me like someone took the Nightmare on Elm Street movies a little bit too seriously as a child.
You're deflecting a lot here. Ubisoft needed to add those models. It's the right thing to do.
They are criticizes by women. You call their criticisms as subjective to downplay their voices.
"What would Link do?" Also Link can be anything like a wolf or deku shrub but not a woman. Got it. Link is designed to save the Princess because the creators think that is what men are supposed to do and women need saving.
That's better? Peach being mostly useless? I am starting to get a better understanding of your thought process now.
Again. Using the subjective comment to downplay a woman's criticism on the game industrty.
Now you play the authority card. Like, you're downplaying issues like they're nothing. You should do some reflecting.
To be honest I dont know why people are so proud of being far right conservatists while it is actually embarassing. Being far right is always associated with narrow minded, racism, bigotry to some kind of certain people. At least that's how it is in my country
Lord. Some perspective is in order. stufte says that this forum skews so far left that everything outside of it looks extreme right. Then after he says that, he gets dogpiled and labeled alt-right. If that isn't a great example of his very point, I don't know what is. We can have a discussion about the degree to which toxicity pervades a culture and industry without immediately assuming anyone who disagrees with the orthodoxy is an agent of a vast alt-right army.
Not to pull the 'hey one point in your argument is false, so the rest is bs" but the overly sexualized female model thing im pretty sure we moved past on it just being 'subjective'. While we've moved forward, there's plenty of ways to go particularly in that category.
Anyone who says women criticizing female models is subjective (a way to downplay the criticisms) definitely deserves an eyebrow raise.
There was an Assassin's Creed with a female protagonist years before the Unity controversy. And adding a female protagonist to the next game apparently doesn't count, because reasons. Even though Evie was an awesome character who totally stole the show over her useless brother. The series started with a protagonist from the Middle East, AC3 features a Native American, and the latest entry stars a black man. There's also AC Freedom Cry, and Chronicles India/China if you want to count DLC and spinoffs. If you're going to complain about a lack of diversity in a game series, I don't think AC is the best one to attack.
Are you even reading what you're writing? It's certainly not objective. It has to be subjective otherwise it is not subject to critique by a value system. You WANT it to be a subjective statement.
Oh ffs. Ubi doesn't need to do anything it doesn't want to.
You didn't say "criticized by women" in your first post, but even so, women aren't a monolith.
The link debate is pointless, and you can again read my statement of "it's their choice"
So now I'm bad for (sorta) relenting to the Peach thing. Bravo.
Women can criticize the game industry, the can also be wrong about it. Shocking I know.
I play the authority card because I am an authority. I know what I'm talking about.
Just say what you want to say instead of beating around the bush about it.
Women aren't a hivemind. Subjective as in it may be the opinions of that individual woman, or that woman plus other women who agree.
Just because you can find a woman or women who say things you agree with doesn't mean that's discussion over and anyone who dares challenge your stance is some closet suspect worthy of your "eyebrow raising". That's confirmation bias and arrogance in play. As long as someone is being respectful challenging your or others opinions that is the basis of subjective debate.
You'll find it hard to suggest there is an objective stance on say Bayonetta. Some women like Bayonetta, others won't. No one is necessarily wrong, and as long as everyone argues respectfully that character in particular is rife with subjective views depending on your personal feelings and tolerance for sex and sexuality.
Last edited:
Saw it was The Guardian, expected something exactly like this.
There's subjective and subjective. Calling the amount of criticisms against overly sexualized models subjective is an easy way to downplay the arguments put forth. Nuance is removed and the argument of "it is subjective" is had to deflect from the obvious issues that is female models and outfits designed by men throughout the industry. Again, bikini armor doesn't exist in 1 game.
I'm talking about alt-right and GamerGate being widespread on online gaming discussion. It's not, I disagree with these people so they are, but they use the same type of rhetoric that is promoting their ideals, which is steeped in racism, sexism and fascism. You then said maybe you just don't find those ideals bad. So yeah, I have no idea if that is you or not.
Whataboutism isn't a buzzword. It means trying to deflect an argument by saying 'but what about...' which is what you were doing by trying to bring in tv and other mediums. We aren't talking about that. They are irrelevant to the discussion of the proliferation of ring wing ideology in online gaming discussion and circles.
I find it disappointing that news outlet have to resort to clickbait articles like these to stay relevant. Any reader with some knowledge of videogames can clearly see the many fallacies and half truths the article is trying to present. It is no wonder many invididuals now do not trust the news media; there is so much slant, bias and misrepresentation going on.
The whole premise of this article can be discounted by the fact that the article implied that only Western developers make videogames.
The whole premise of this article can be discounted by the fact that the article implied that only Western developers make videogames.
The Guardian is normally a pretty decent left wing source, although I quite like The Independent. The author of this article seems a bit whacky in his other work so it's probably just going to be chalked up as one dodgy article amongst many better ones.
I never said I don't find those ideals bad. But you were happy to assume things about me, which helps me understand where your line is.
I think you've been getting misinterpreted a lot, but here is where I don't agree. Like, you've said stuff that's perfectly fine, but you can't claim GG is not part of the industry when people like Tim Soret and Daniel Vavra are a part of it.
I also maintain that not speaking out against GG by name is complicity and that's been the case for major companies like Sony and Nintendo. Though I doubt Japan has the same kind of infiltration that America and Europe have had with the alt-right (but sometimes you do get situations like that one anime director being a holocaust denier). There are absolutely GGers hired and employed all over the place.
I mean the creator of one of the most popular games of all time (Notch) is a total fucking GG-ish shithead.
You set yourself up for that assumption, meaning to or not. I was very explicit in that I was referring to GamerGate/alt-right, and you made that statement amidst that. *Shrug* So you either chose your words poorly or were trying to downplay the extreme belief systems of those groups as mere opinion
Again, video games being the perfect scapegoat when simple solutions to complex political problems don't exist.
You keep saying subjective in such a broad way. I am actually quite curious, out of all the criticisms about character models and women criticizing the industry as a whole, what makes you have this broad opinion that they are subjective and can be wrong? Like, for such tiny responses we are exchanging you are emphasizing the subjectivity and how they can be wrong, so what criticisms and what not make you sway that way?
I work with a LOT of people I disagree with both morally and intellectually. This doesn't make them bad people, nor do they represent the industry (I don't either). Claiming that "the industry" has major problems is false IMO, because no one person represents it. There's good and bad to be had, but it's mostly good.
Because most of what you brought to the table IS subjective. Nothing you posted was an objective truth.
You and others are arguing with me in bad faith. It's some sort of attempt to mark me as a bad seed, to get me to say something bannable instead of engaging with me honestly.
I'll stop engaging now.
My issue really is the author seems to have just gone through the top selling/lead franchises to make his point.
pro-imperialism? throw in 4x games in there. I mean Civilization is among the most progressive of the bunch in terms of hopeful rhetoric, de-emphasis on war , inclusion but why is it in there?
Xcom as an analog of fear of foreigners? So are all alien movies now also right wing?
There's gem in there somewhere, but instead of a nuanced discussion about the dude bro culture around games that sell 100x more to young adults than Civ, we get pretty much every single top tier video game thrown under the bus.
That's not ok.
pro-imperialism? throw in 4x games in there. I mean Civilization is among the most progressive of the bunch in terms of hopeful rhetoric, de-emphasis on war , inclusion but why is it in there?
Xcom as an analog of fear of foreigners? So are all alien movies now also right wing?
There's gem in there somewhere, but instead of a nuanced discussion about the dude bro culture around games that sell 100x more to young adults than Civ, we get pretty much every single top tier video game thrown under the bus.
That's not ok.
You do realize that video game industry, just like every other, has a finite amount of resources that can be put into developing games, and that amount is mostly determined by the market?
Congratulations: this is nonsense.
Again, I don't think you're even reading what you're writing. stufte is criticizing a statement. A dialectic refines known truth by synthesizing between the thesis and the antithesis. You are nullifying his criticism. Who is the one removing nuance?
If you can't even form a coherent sentence, how can I trust you to make a serious judgment of the state of the world or especially stufte's character? If it sounds like I'm attacking you, it's because I am. He's made the choice to put his place of employment on his profile and his identity is known to administrators, which is a serious risk on his behalf. If you're going to equate him with people who are literally marching to rid the US of Jewish influence and risk his entire livelihood, you better have a serious reason to do so, or else you're just another chaotic and malignant force rampagining across the internet who chooses to do so because he has nothing to lose.
Here is where you lose me. Daniel Vavra is flat out a bad person. Notch is FLAT OUT, 100%, a bad person. Even if you think they don't represent the industry, if they champion a sexual harassment movement, and say the things they say... they're not good people.
Also, you should be concerned about this, because if people like that get into leadership positions, it has massive ramifications for hiring policies, workplace atmosphere, and power dynamics. Brad Wardell's shitty behavior at Stardock, for example, is well-documented and the industry would be better without him in it.
That's actually one of the points i wish was more explored. Games like Stellaris and Hearts of Iron allow you to basically role-play as fascist dictator, and if you look at the community surrounding this games, especially on youtube, it can very problematic. Even Civ, praised for being inclusive, still has barbarians, which are treated like subhumans, incapable of building civilization.
Denying the industry has an issue after the firestorm of GamerGate, something that helped the proliferation of the alt-right into the mainstream, raises a huge red flag, so yeah, it probably is better if you just stop. There's no way anyone can make that statement without being blissfully ignorant or much worse
Oh no, what do my EU IV, Crusader Kings 2, Civ (pick a version), Endless Space 2, XCOM (1&2), Total War and other Strategy games tell about me!? I am greatly concerned now and will immediately delete all of them from my PC.
I am also grateful I didn't buy ROTK during the last KOEI sale.
The reach on that article is longer then Shaq's arms. There are some good points to be made around gaming and inclusion but the ones author went after are nuts.
Plants vs Zombies, really?
I am also grateful I didn't buy ROTK during the last KOEI sale.
The reach on that article is longer then Shaq's arms. There are some good points to be made around gaming and inclusion but the ones author went after are nuts.
Plants vs Zombies, really?
I don't get it. Big words hurt me tiny brain. Antithesis? Is that a video game?
You're secretly a Nazi who claims to enjoy these games for asinine things like "gameplay" or "challenge", but really you're just living out your sick fantasies of purifying the world through complete domination.
You'd be surprised how many crypto-fascists in the Paradox community.
Well, you know those oil resources in Civ? You could be doing electric cars and solar batteries instead! Not to mention SimCity!
Seriously, the article is mostly pointless trash. There is a conversation to be had around how various nations are portrayed. Instead we get this drivel.
Edit:
Well, at least Imperialist bastard of some sort. I just conquered half the world as Ming! The horror. I also burned and raveged across the world guiding the Huns. Let's not even mention incest in Crusader Kings 2!
Edit:
There are bad apples in any community, sure. However it's not just Paradox, author lists games from XCOM to Plants vs Zombies. There is a topic of discussion but it has nothing to do with auhor's nonsence.
Under this standard it becomes basically impossible to say that any group of people have major problems. Saying an organization or industry has major problems is not saying that every single person, or even most people, are very bad mean nasty people. Organizations are not simply the aggregate of the people in them. To argue such is nothing but deflection. When someone posts about sexual harassment faced by women, do you say #notallmen? Is your response to structural racism to insist that you and your friends are totally not racist ? Because that's not the issue and never was.
In the case of the videogame industry, it has a major problem in that it's most vocal and lucrative target demographic is wildly bigoted, and the market power of this group is such that major publishers will be reluctant to push back on their bullshit in any explicit way. You can see this in the industry's cowardly response to gamergate. None of this implies even a plurality of people in the industry are themselves, as individuals, bigots.
It is not at all a remarkable thing to have major problems. Most things do. My own field has major fucking problems even though I deeply respect many people working within it and believe that the field of a whole is a net positive for society. Saying something has major problems doesn't mean you think it should all be burned to the ground (though you may get that impression of the tenor of some posts).
That said, those accusing you of being a gamergater based on your points are way out of line, and also missing the point in the same way you are.
Eh, not really. I mean, as you point out very well in post, it's very hard for someone to make such a statement that isn't born out of either ignorance or them being in on the game. And I think it's pretty undeniable he's been using a lot of common GamerGate/alt-right rhetoric through this conversation (deflection, downplaying extreme views as just opinion, and trying to paint a left-leaning place as overly extreme compared to supposedly more moderate places elsewhere).
After GG and the rise of the alt-right into the mainstream, it's dishonest on our part to put our heads in the sand to this kind of stuff. Dishonest and very dangerous.
Having said that, who knows, maybe he isn't part of that group and, despite apparently being in the industry, is totally unaware of the massive issues it has and is just a relatively normal person who has bought into alt-right rhetoric without seeing the intention behind it. It is hard to tell, but I don't think it makes it less a point to battle that rhetoric when we see it.
Starting with Ubisoft to prove that gaming industry has Alt-Right problem is some wildest shit I've seen.