The problem is that what is considered political is different depending on who you are.
This and it's a complex, and vague term. Hence why this article makes absolutely no sense.
Now, if he meant which is not clear games that are appealing to minorities and are left leaning then that's really his own prejudice. I don't see it changing anytime soon in gaming. Morsoe, with Trump and the bigots in power gaming has to take a more socially active approach.
@mrbojangles25: I wasn't really talking about Wolfenstein. But that's fine let's look at these examples.
1. What about the cringe worthy reviews from Polygon on TW3 because a game created by a bunch of Polaks didn't have more people of color? Or the disappointment that they didn't rewrite Geralts character so he could also romance men?
2. What about the cringe worthy review from IGN on DQ11 because the thought some of the female characters were being sexualized ( yes DQ11 where all the characters look like dolls).
3. The bitching about Tomb Raider because Laura is shown violently dying(they want strong female heroes as long as they are unstoppable).
4. The shitstorm CD project red got over a simple gender Joke
5. The bitching about "Kingdom come deliverance ( although historically accurate) didn't have female knights or more people of color in it?
6. The sudden outrage from Ivy's look on SC6( despite the fact shes looked like that for almost 20 years now)
The NPC's( the left) bitch about this on a regular basis and when dev's pander to them the devs want a pat on the back and get upset everytime a grown man doesn't want to play as a 110 lbs lesbo as the main character in their action games. It's fine to have preferences and different views but it seems the left have campaigned for certain things and if you are not on bored with it everytime you are the standard ( racist, misogynist, homaphopbe or whatever other common term they repeat over and over again.
Seems silly to me to get upset about politics in video games. Practically every game has some sort of violence. It’s not like the game is telling me to kill people or saying that we should be okay with violence. Likewise even if politics were put in a videogame I’m not gonna be swayed to start leaning towards that thinking. Whoever is concerned about politics in video games should likewise be concerned with all the sex/violence/criminal behavior already in their video games.
@mrbojangles25: I wasn't really talking about Wolfenstein. But that's fine let's look at these examples.
1. What about the cringe worthy reviews from Polygon on TW3 because a game created by a bunch of Polaks didn't have more people of color? Or the disappointment that they didn't rewrite Geralts character so he could also romance men?
2. What about the cringe worthy review from IGN on DQ11 because the thought some of the female characters were being sexualized ( yes DQ11 where all the characters look like dolls).
3. The bitching about Tomb Raider because Laura is shown violently dying(they want strong female heroes as long as they are unstoppable).
4. The shitstorm CD project red got over a simple gender Joke
5. The bitching about "Kingdom come deliverance ( although historically accurate) didn't have female knights or more people of color in it?
6. The sudden outrage from Ivy's look on SC6( despite the fact shes looked like that for almost 20 years now)
The NPC's( the left) bitch about this on a regular basis and when dev's pander to them the devs want a pat on the back and get upset everytime a grown man doesn't want to play as a 110 lbs lesbo as the main character in their action games. It's fine to have preferences and different views but it seems the left have campaigned for certain things and if you are not on bored with it everytime you are the standard ( racist, misogynist, homaphopbe or whatever other common term they repeat over and over again.
Your whole post is about journalism and less about if politics is bad for business in gaming. Two completely different things.
Politics is only an issue when the views are not shared. Its only because more "non traditional" views are more prominent are we seeing more "concern" about politics in game.
Amen.
Politics is just a dog whistle for "don't make me confront other people and cultures because it makes me uncomfortable."
Ubisoft isn't making Tom Clancy games anymore? Those are political as it gets. But, whatever, I know what they mean. Anything that doesn't offend angry right wing gamers... which is damn near everything these days. Of course politics right of center is perfectly fine. Anything or person that doesn't fit into the usual demo is going to be viewed as "identity politics" and the weeping and gnashing will commence.
@zappat: Everything is political, even when you're trying not to be political, you're, ironically, being political.
This is what I was trying to say but buried it under reams of text everyone skimmed past.
This forum is a joke when it comes to politics. Everyone wants to denounce someone in very strong terms then say politics doesn't even exist!
The stupid thing is, just read the topic title again.
"Being openly political..." That means he cannot deny the fiercely conservative narrative of Rainbow 6 (is it a Rainbow 6?) games.
It's laughable to suggest this USA gun fantasy is not a right wing wet dream like all Tom Clancy games are. At least the first game was actually a deep game and fun.
He's 100% correct. Wish more devs would follow his lead, like machinegames after the horrible wolf 2.
Could you clarify why you think wolf 2 was horrible? What elements were horrible to you? I rather liked the game and while I don't think it really brought anything new in gameplay it was still quite enjoyable.
@mrbojangles25: I wasn't really talking about Wolfenstein. But that's fine let's look at these examples.
1. What about the cringe worthy reviews from Polygon on TW3 because a game created by a bunch of Polaks didn't have more people of color? Or the disappointment that they didn't rewrite Geralts character so he could also romance men?
2. What about the cringe worthy review from IGN on DQ11 because the thought some of the female characters were being sexualized ( yes DQ11 where all the characters look like dolls).
3. The bitching about Tomb Raider because Laura is shown violently dying(they want strong female heroes as long as they are unstoppable).
4. The shitstorm CD project red got over a simple gender Joke
5. The bitching about "Kingdom come deliverance ( although historically accurate) didn't have female knights or more people of color in it?
6. The sudden outrage from Ivy's look on SC6( despite the fact shes looked like that for almost 20 years now)
The NPC's( the left) bitch about this on a regular basis and when dev's pander to them the devs want a pat on the back and get upset everytime a grown man doesn't want to play as a 110 lbs lesbo as the main character in their action games. It's fine to have preferences and different views but it seems the left have campaigned for certain things and if you are not on bored with it everytime you are the standard ( racist, misogynist, homaphopbe or whatever other common term they repeat over and over again.
"Help! My right to indignation is under attack!" that's basically what I hear when this shit happens.
The left feels that their race/sex/etc is under attack, interprets what simply is as a perceived threat, and then writes articles and commentary on things.
The right then sees this outrage as an attack on their entitlement to ignorance, and makes a bigger deal out of it than they need to.
I get it, man, I do; every time I see the Ubisoft "This game was developed by an international team of carebears of all races and beartypes and sexual orientation and gender and derp derp derp" nonsense on my loading screen, I can't help but roll my eyes because, frankly, I don't really care. But you make it sound like only one side is at fault here when really it's both.
I think it's actually important to have some sort of political or social commentary in any form of entertainment. Ascribing deeper meaning to things is a good quality to me, though it needs to be subtle, tasteful, and fair.
If all youre doing is making a game and going "Rawr! I have something say, liberals/conservatives suck rabble rabble rabble" then you are no better than your average college-age douchebag. But if you can say something true but do it in a clever way, or comment on the current state of things without being a pretentious prick, then I say go for it.
Surprised this was coming from a Ubisoft studio, they are arguably one of the most vocal of publishers in the social and political realm. Especially The Division developer; that faction of "firemen" in the first Division game felt to me like right-wing nutjobs.
@fedor said:
He's 100% correct. Wish more devs would follow his lead, like machinegames after the horrible wolf 2.
lol what was politically relevant (to current issues) about Wolfenstein 2?
If you can't get on board with nazi killing, or think it's some sort of commentary on Trump, you have problems.
Tell that shit to the media, that's a fraction of the articles, not to mention the countless videos on the subject. I don't support Trump, I just don't want current day politics in my games. It's toxic nonsense. Wolf 2 sucked btw.
all the videos are abstract and do not deal with specfic examples EXCEPT the following
A. Killing Nazis is politcal
and
B. Having a gay couple in your video games is being poltical.
@mrbojangles25: I think the main difference is the people on the right who bitch about it or regulated to Twitter or forums and then in many cases are just banned. The left on the other hand happen to often be journalists at some of the largest gaming sites in the world. They actually influence these devs in a way since they review their games. Most seem to be completely ignorant to the views of the right dehumanizing them the moment they speak out.
And that's the problem... one side actually has power and isn't willing to hear any criticisms on it. Hell look at Resetera for an example. I would have been banned already just for the comments made in this thread. And to top it off most gaming journalists are awful. So why are they in that position to review and effect games when they often can even do their job well?
@blackhairedhero: Yeah I sort of said the same thing as you in another thread about the breast physics in Dead or Alive haha.
I don't know I think it's up to us in the end. Does anyone take gaming journalism seriously? Is there even legit gaming journalism any more? My thoughts are that gaming should be fun, and when you write nonsense articles about nonexistent issues, you just piss people off (maybe that's their intention). It's fun to argue about but should not dictate policy.
I read something like any of the articles you posted and I just think "Well, I guess there's that" and ignore it. I don't think a lot of people take it seriously. At least I hope they don't. I'm more worried about non-gamers than I am the game industry. Ubisoft might be socially and politically conscious and liberal, but in the end I am still playing a badass Greek cutting throats, spearing hearts, and sleeping with dozens of people across the Greek isles *shrug* gaming hasn't really changed.
@blackballs: My post was to counter his argument that only the right bitched about political issues in games. It just happens many on the left that do it are actual journalists which makes it worse.
As far as if it's good or bad that's a subjective answer. I know when Ubisoft bragged about having the first gender neutral character in its game( I think it was AC syndicate?) I was thinking I honestly don't give a shit about this but why is the rest of the game so bad? Or was it necessary for "Naughty Dog" to make me go through two boss battles with Nadine Ross where I'm not even allowed to land a punch to show me how bad ass she is?
@mrbojangles25: The sad thing I think the developers do take gaming journalist seriously. And they shouldn't because they represent a radical far left that honestly doesn't give a shit about games. And yes I think non gamers are an issue( I dont think EA has a single gamer in a position of power).
But see my examples earlier in this thread. Do I need two unwinnable boss battles in a game for you to show me how bad ass your female villain is? Is there a reason Mary Jane in the new Spiderman looks like plain Jane? Why is a Black Chick a Paratrooper in WW2? And if I have an issue with any of the above I'm a Mysoginist, Sexist and Racist.
Politics is only an issue when the views are not shared. Its only because more "non traditional" views are more prominent are we seeing more "concern" about politics in game.
Yep! And this comes from a developer tied with Ubisoft, who has HISTORICALLY published and developed games the anti-SJW/alt-right sympathizers have dubbed "political". Including...
-Beyond Good and Evil (soon 2, and OH BOY, they'll have a ball with that one and by then, Ancel will go from "French Miyamoto" to "cucked Miyamoto")
-Far Cry 5 ("oh but this is different because libs are made fun of too", yeah, bite me, it's still political)
-Assassin's Creed (see the disclaimer before EVERY AC game starts, plus one game in the series has a pretty critical message to America that would not fly today)
EDIT: Oh, and coming from a dev linked with the "Tom Clancy" name to, who last I checked WROTE highly political books in fictional settings. A series of which were adapted into movies (starring two Hollywood liberals as one character no less) covering the Cold War, The Troubles (Irish Republicanism), and corruption in the US and South America.
I wish Disney had this attitude, could have saved Star Wars from Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy.
You must've jumped for joy when they fired an MCU director known for his anti-Trump views after he made some not so PC jokes from TEN YEARS AGO! And how can Star Wars not be political, given it was about Republic vs Confederates/Empire vs Rebels?
Well if you want to sell your game then cutting off half or more of your fan base is not a good start.
Games like GTA feature politics, but they take the piss out of all sides to be funny, a lot of other games get way too serious in pushing agendas.
One example being that Wolfenstien advert (I assume it's part of the game too) about mocking people who vote in a particular way in real life, it wasn't even comedic, I don't know what it was.
does having a gay couple in your video game make that aspect political?
...
Featuring anything the person is uncomfortable and/or unfamiliar with counts as "jamming it down their throat" or as "an agenda" :P
You know, even despite the fact that gay people do exist and you do encounter them on occasion. Still, if it's in their game and gay people are not part of their worldview, it seems to alienate them.
No offense mrbojangles25, but this is really a lazy argument.
To answer tyrit's question, having a gay character in your game doesn't immediately make that aspect political, no. However, depending on how it's executed can certainly be construed as pushing an agenda, and TLoU 2's E3 trailer is a prime example of this. It starts out shoving Ellie's (and another character's) sexual orientation into our faces, of which it appears to hold absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the events subsequent, and gives us no context as to why she's dancing with this particular girl, how they met, or why she even matters.
What it screams is, "Remember Ellie? She's a lesbian, don't cha know, and we have to reinforce it! Deal with it! Diversity, inclusiveness, justice for all, rah rah rah!!"
That is politically driven, and as long as people continue to insist placing someone's sexual orientation up on a pedestal, effectively objectifying it instead of viewing and handling it as a complex part of a their person and individual growth, it's never going to be seen as natural or accepted. The existence of one's orientation isn't the issue, the focus on highlighting that it exists at all above all other considerations is. These people that do so in such artificial and shoehorned ways (as this trailer felt to do) are precisely the problem. Then predictably they get all up and huffy, quickly slinging accusations of bigotry, non-inclusiveness, "privilege", etc when people push back, them not opposing it because they're unfamiliar or phobic about gays/transgenders, etc, but because IT IS WHOLLY IRRELEVANT ON ITS OWN. Place it in its own well-executed and built up context and it is far more likely to be accepted, and even greatly praised, as Left Behind's revelation was.
What I believe the real problem here is that people so desperately desire representation that they don't care if it's artificially or one-dimensionally done, simply done, and then attack others when that's (rightly) opposed. It's vindication for their own frustrations, and it's lazy.
does having a gay couple in your video game make that aspect political?
...
Featuring anything the person is uncomfortable and/or unfamiliar with counts as "jamming it down their throat" or as "an agenda" :P
You know, even despite the fact that gay people do exist and you do encounter them on occasion. Still, if it's in their game and gay people are not part of their worldview, it seems to alienate them.
No offense mrbojangles25, but this is really a lazy argument.
To answer tyrit's question, having a gay character in your game doesn't immediately make that aspect political, no. However, depending on how it's executed can certainly be construed as pushing an agenda, and TLoU 2's E3 trailer is a prime example of this. It starts out shoving Ellie's (and another character's) sexual orientation into our faces, of which it appears to hold absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the events subsequent, and gives us no context as to why she's dancing with this particular girl, how they met, or why she matters.
What it screams is, "Remember Ellie? She's a lesbian, don't cha know, and we have to reinforce it! Deal with it! Diversity, inclusiveness, justice for all, rah rah rah!!"
That is politically driven, and as long as people continue to insist placing someone's sexual orientation up on a pedestal, essentially objectifying it, instead of viewing and handling it as a complex part of a their identity and individual growth, it's never going to be seen as natural or accepted. The existence of one's orientation isn't the problem, the focus on highlighting that it exists at all above all other considerations is. These people that do so in such artificial and shoehorned ways (as this trailer felt to do) are precisely the problem. Then predictably, they get all up and huffy, quickly accusing others of bigotry, non-inclusiveness, etc when people push back, them not opposing it because they're unfamiliar or phobic about gays/transgenders, etc, but because IT IS WHOLLY IRRELEVANT ON ITS OWN. Place it in its own well executed and built up context and it is far more likely to be accepted, and even greatly praised, as Left Behind's revelation was.
What I believe the real problem here is that people so desperately desire representation that they don't care if it's artificially or one-dimensionally done, simply done, and then attack others when that's opposed. It's vindication for their own frustrations, and it's lazy.
The whole "Ellie Argument" is bullshit, though. They weren't shoving it in our faces, they simply made a gay character and decided to show that. It's not about the homosexuality, it's about the romantic theme. How many commercials have we seen where you got some grizzled soldier talking about an invasion going "First they took our homes. Then our country. Then they took my woman. Grumble grumble grumble time for payback" and hey, we are totally fine with that; but if you had the same dude saying that except "...then they took my man" you'd be like "WOH WOH WOH! AGENDA ALERT! Stop shoving this gay stuff in my face". It's not an agenda, it's a theme. Looks past the gay!
And I get it, you know; I know you folks don't hate gays, you're just uncomfortable around them. You wouldn't mind if her sexuality was pushed to the back and it got in a little forgetful blurb somewhere in the game. But that is in itself a mild form of bigotry. You're telling developers and other artists that it's OK to be gay, you just can't make it a "thing", you gotta go to the back [of the bus].
I have to ask, though: will there ever be a day where it won't be a thing to you people?
Just...stop making it out to be a big deal. I know you feel like you have to when the idiot media goes "OMFG Ellie is a lesbian AND it's AMAZING!" but just resist the urge to be contrarian. Ignore them.
The OP is a bit silly. If a the game designer wants it to have political themes, there is nothing wrong with that. People mostly just seem to be upset at females and minorities being more NPCs than usual. That's all I've taken away from this. Mostly incels, but who cares what they think.
The OP is a bit silly. If a the game designer wants it to have political themes, there is nothing wrong with that. People mostly just seem to be upset at females and minorities being more NPCs than usual. That's all I've taken away from this. Mostly incels, but who cares what they think.
I think this is more about political agendas than political themes , I guess I didn't specify that in my original comment though
The OP is a bit silly. If a the game designer wants it to have political themes, there is nothing wrong with that. People mostly just seem to be upset at females and minorities being more NPCs than usual. That's all I've taken away from this. Mostly incels, but who cares what they think.
I think this is more about political agendas than political themes , I guess I didn't specify that in my original comment though
It's fairly obvious that what's you meant.
Heck, the reply even gets, and just contorts it into anyone not liking political agenda as the worst thing humanly possible, baby insults.
I wish Disney had this attitude, could have saved Star Wars from Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy.
You must've jumped for joy when they fired an MCU director known for his anti-Trump views after he made some not so PC jokes from TEN YEARS AGO! And how can Star Wars not be political, given it was about Republic vs Confederates/Empire vs Rebels?
They tried to make episode 1/3 political. Everyone hated them.
Star Wars (the first 3) are primarily fantasy movies with no real political message. It's more about religion, specifically zen. And very basic one at that. Which is fine. At it's heart it's a small scale story with an epic backdrop. Which is probably the real reason Disney are messing up so bad. Goerge Lucas made a story about family, Last Jedi shat on all that. Turned Luke into a prick with a shitty death etc... But that's been gone over in a billion youtube gimmi-money vids.
No offense mrbojangles25, but this is really a lazy argument.
To answer tyrit's question, having a gay character in your game doesn't immediately make that aspect political, no. However, depending on how it's executed can certainly be construed as pushing an agenda, and TLoU 2's E3 trailer is a prime example of this. It starts out shoving Ellie's (and another character's) sexual orientation into our faces, of which it appears to hold absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the events subsequent, and gives us no context as to why she's dancing with this particular girl, how they met, or why she matters.
What it screams is, "Remember Ellie? She's a lesbian, don't cha know, and we have to reinforce it! Deal with it! Diversity, inclusiveness, justice for all, rah rah rah!!"
That is politically driven, and as long as people continue to insist placing someone's sexual orientation up on a pedestal, essentially objectifying it, instead of viewing and handling it as a complex part of a their identity and individual growth, it's never going to be seen as natural or accepted. The existence of one's orientation isn't the problem, the focus on highlighting that it exists at all above all other considerations is. These people that do so in such artificial and shoehorned ways (as this trailer felt to do) are precisely the problem. Then predictably, they get all up and huffy, quickly accusing others of bigotry, non-inclusiveness, etc when people push back, them not opposing it because they're unfamiliar or phobic about gays/transgenders, etc, but because IT IS WHOLLY IRRELEVANT ON ITS OWN. Place it in its own well executed and built up context and it is far more likely to be accepted, and even greatly praised, as Left Behind's revelation was.
What I believe the real problem here is that people so desperately desire representation that they don't care if it's artificially or one-dimensionally done, simply done, and then attack others when that's opposed. It's vindication for their own frustrations, and it's lazy.
The whole "Ellie Argument" is bullshit, though. They weren't shoving it in our faces, they simply made a gay character and decided to show that. It's not about the homosexuality, it's about the romantic theme. How many commercials have we seen where you got some grizzled soldier talking about an invasion going "First they took our homes. Then our country. Then they took my woman. Grumble grumble grumble time for payback" and hey, we are totally fine with that; but if you had the same dude saying that except "...then they took my man" you'd be like "WOH WOH WOH! AGENDA ALERT! Stop shoving this gay stuff in my face". It's not an agenda, it's a theme. Looks past the gay!
And I get it, you know; I know you folks don't hate gays, you're just uncomfortable around them. You wouldn't mind if her sexuality was pushed to the back and it got in a little forgetful blurb somewhere in the game. But that is in itself a mild form of bigotry. You're telling developers and other artists that it's OK to be gay, you just can't make it a "thing", you gotta go to the back [of the bus].
I have to ask, though: will there ever be a day where it won't be a thing to you people?
Just...stop making it out to be a big deal. I know you feel like you have to when the idiot media goes "OMFG Ellie is a lesbian AND it's AMAZING!" but just resist the urge to be contrarian. Ignore them.
Don't assume me a bigot, that's not apparent from my points and frankly it's uncalled for. I'm not at all uncomfortable and as I noted in my OP, I loved Ellie and Riley's revelation in Left Behind. It was very touching and was one of the more natural and sincere depictions of a relationship evolving I've ever seen portrayed in media.
Let's do an experiment. Let's assume in Left Behind both Riley and Ellie survived at the end so all went on TLoU's journey together. We watched their relationship develop. So the E3 trailer opens with the dance and kissing scene between them. I would have zero issue with that because Ellie and Riley's relationship had been earned, and as such, their intimacy is a demonstration of their feelings for each other. In that case, them being physically intimate wouldn't even be an issue, it would be entirely natural and expected. But when you place Ellie in a stranger's arms and show a kiss with no relationship prior, that immediately places emphasis on her orientation and not much else. Doesn't it? I would feel the exactsame way had TLoU 2's trailer opened with a straight couple. If it had Joel dancing with Tess (let's assume she survived instead of Riley), it wouldn't be about their sexuality at all, but of them furthering their relationship. But no, instead, he's dancing with a stranger and a kiss occurs.
What am I supposed to gather from that aside that two people are seeking a night of romance? There's no difference with Ellie and a stranger. Why is such a scene even in there in the first place? "Romantic theme" isn't enough, it's out of place and narratively undeveloped regardless of sexual orientation, so the only reason I can think of for its inclusion is to make an effort to denote that orientation. If it were a scene of Joel dancing with a stranger and a kiss happened, I believe people would be wondering what the hell it was included for given how the rest of the trailer played out. But no, since Ellie's been established as a lesbian, its motive must remain unquestioned lest we're declared BIGOTS who don't accept and fear everyone not like us if we do so. I'm not the one where it's a "thing" to me. I couldn't care less about what side people bat for, it doesn't even enter my mind because I view humans as very complex and multi-dimensional creatures, which they are. However, I do have a problem with agendas.
It is those that insist on making it a big deal that cause it to be a big deal. They objectify sexual preference, they extricate it from individuality, then they demand its recognition removed from that individuality and any narrative context, and then they dare to imply others bigots when they reject such a one-dimensional portrayal and implementation of very simplistic individualism simply for the sake of equal representation. It's beyond absurd.
@mrbojangles25: I wasn't really talking about Wolfenstein. But that's fine let's look at these examples.
1. What about the cringe worthy reviews from Polygon on TW3 because a game created by a bunch of Polaks didn't have more people of color? Or the disappointment that they didn't rewrite Geralts character so he could also romance men?
2. What about the cringe worthy review from IGN on DQ11 because the thought some of the female characters were being sexualized ( yes DQ11 where all the characters look like dolls).
3. The bitching about Tomb Raider because Laura is shown violently dying(they want strong female heroes as long as they are unstoppable).
4. The shitstorm CD project red got over a simple gender Joke
5. The bitching about "Kingdom come deliverance ( although historically accurate) didn't have female knights or more people of color in it?
6. The sudden outrage from Ivy's look on SC6( despite the fact shes looked like that for almost 20 years now)
The NPC's( the left) bitch about this on a regular basis and when dev's pander to them the devs want a pat on the back and get upset everytime a grown man doesn't want to play as a 110 lbs lesbo as the main character in their action games. It's fine to have preferences and different views but it seems the left have campaigned for certain things and if you are not on bored with it everytime you are the standard ( racist, misogynist, homaphopbe or whatever other common term they repeat over and over again.
inclusiveness of these groups makes you feel pretty insecure, huh. your argument is wrong for all your points- the only problem is when they take a character that is of one background and change it (making Clarke Kent black or Lara Croft an asian woman would be examples). Developers including diverse groups of all walks of life in games and then you bitching about it is pretty low.
@blackhairedhero Most seem to be completely ignorant to the views of the right dehumanizing them the moment they speak out.
And that's the problem... one side actually has power [leftist journalists]
I think you will find the right has more power than the left in US government and society.
@MirkoS77 extricate
This is my word of the day! You're right though. Putting a gay kiss in a game outside of any context just makes that scene about sexuality whether it be a straight or gay kiss. So to include an relationship which has only been given purely sexual reference point, then the message is solely about sex itself which could only be considered political if you consider homosexuality itself to be a political issue.
To include homosexuality in your game out of context is clearly pandering to an imaginary audience that find homosexuality innately titillating or outrageous.
Having said all that, homosexuality remains an issue in wider society and is still not accepted by alot of people so if you are going to tell a story about homosexuality it would be normal to address this point in a realistic story.
It's quite rare to see people kissing in public because it remains somewhat taboo and is frankly not what people want to see when they're trying to enjoy their pint or whatever. So to remove social taboos about openly gay people kissing passionately in public which would attract some looks in a none-gay bar is distorting reality into a fantasy of your own devices that is removed from reality and a bias you have as a writer of fiction.
Even if your story is simplistic, to remove the political aspect of openly gay relationships in a wider social context reduces that complex emotional situation into a simple celebration of sex and rejection of human frailty and complexity.
No offense mrbojangles25, but this is really a lazy argument.
To answer tyrit's question, having a gay character in your game doesn't immediately make that aspect political, no. However, depending on how it's executed can certainly be construed as pushing an agenda, and TLoU 2's E3 trailer is a prime example of this. It starts out shoving Ellie's (and another character's) sexual orientation into our faces, of which it appears to hold absolutely no relevance whatsoever to the events subsequent, and gives us no context as to why she's dancing with this particular girl, how they met, or why she matters.
What it screams is, "Remember Ellie? She's a lesbian, don't cha know, and we have to reinforce it! Deal with it! Diversity, inclusiveness, justice for all, rah rah rah!!"
That is politically driven, and as long as people continue to insist placing someone's sexual orientation up on a pedestal, essentially objectifying it, instead of viewing and handling it as a complex part of a their identity and individual growth, it's never going to be seen as natural or accepted. The existence of one's orientation isn't the problem, the focus on highlighting that it exists at all above all other considerations is. These people that do so in such artificial and shoehorned ways (as this trailer felt to do) are precisely the problem. Then predictably, they get all up and huffy, quickly accusing others of bigotry, non-inclusiveness, etc when people push back, them not opposing it because they're unfamiliar or phobic about gays/transgenders, etc, but because IT IS WHOLLY IRRELEVANT ON ITS OWN. Place it in its own well executed and built up context and it is far more likely to be accepted, and even greatly praised, as Left Behind's revelation was.
What I believe the real problem here is that people so desperately desire representation that they don't care if it's artificially or one-dimensionally done, simply done, and then attack others when that's opposed. It's vindication for their own frustrations, and it's lazy.
The whole "Ellie Argument" is bullshit, though. They weren't shoving it in our faces, they simply made a gay character and decided to show that. It's not about the homosexuality, it's about the romantic theme. How many commercials have we seen where you got some grizzled soldier talking about an invasion going "First they took our homes. Then our country. Then they took my woman. Grumble grumble grumble time for payback" and hey, we are totally fine with that; but if you had the same dude saying that except "...then they took my man" you'd be like "WOH WOH WOH! AGENDA ALERT! Stop shoving this gay stuff in my face". It's not an agenda, it's a theme. Looks past the gay!
And I get it, you know; I know you folks don't hate gays, you're just uncomfortable around them. You wouldn't mind if her sexuality was pushed to the back and it got in a little forgetful blurb somewhere in the game. But that is in itself a mild form of bigotry. You're telling developers and other artists that it's OK to be gay, you just can't make it a "thing", you gotta go to the back [of the bus].
I have to ask, though: will there ever be a day where it won't be a thing to you people?
Just...stop making it out to be a big deal. I know you feel like you have to when the idiot media goes "OMFG Ellie is a lesbian AND it's AMAZING!" but just resist the urge to be contrarian. Ignore them.
Don't assume me a bigot, that's not apparent from my points and frankly it's uncalled for. I'm not at all uncomfortable and as I noted in my OP, I loved Ellie and Riley's revelation in Left Behind. It was very touching and was one of the more natural and sincere depictions of a relationship evolving I've ever seen portrayed in media.
Let's do an experiment. Let's assume in Left Behind both Riley and Ellie survived at the end so all went on TLoU's journey together. We watched their relationship develop. So the E3 trailer opens with the dance and kissing scene between them. I would have zero issue with that because Ellie and Riley's relationship had been earned, and as such, their intimacy is a demonstration of their feelings for each other. In that case, them being physically intimate wouldn't even be an issue, it would be entirely natural and expected. But when you place Ellie in a stranger's arms and show a kiss with no relationship prior, that immediately places emphasis on her orientation and not much else. Doesn't it? I would feel the exactsame way had TLoU 2's trailer opened with a straight couple. If it had Joel dancing with Tess (let's assume she survived instead of Riley), it wouldn't be about their sexuality at all, but of them furthering their relationship. But no, instead, he's dancing with a stranger and a kiss occurs.
What am I supposed to gather from that aside that two people are seeking a night of romance? There's no difference with Ellie and a stranger. Why is such a scene even in there in the first place? "Romantic theme" isn't enough, it's out of place and narratively undeveloped regardless of sexual orientation, so the only reason I can think of for its inclusion is to make an effort to denote that orientation. If it were a scene of Joel dancing with a stranger and a kiss happened, I believe people would be wondering what the hell it was included for given how the rest of the trailer played out. But no, since Ellie's been established as a lesbian, its motive must remain unquestioned lest we're declared BIGOTS who don't accept and fear everyone not like us if we do so. I'm not the one where it's a "thing" to me. I couldn't care less about what side people bat for, it doesn't even enter my mind because I view humans as very complex and multi-dimensional creatures, which they are. However, I do have a problem with agendas.
It is those that insist on making it a big deal that cause it to be a big deal. They objectify sexual preference, they extricate it from individuality, then they demand its recognition removed from that individuality and any narrative context, and then they dare to imply others bigots when they reject such a one-dimensional portrayal and implementation of very simplistic individualism simply for the sake of equal representation. It's beyond absurd.
I love when conservatives play the whole "I'm not a bigot, racist, sexist, xenophobe" argument.
Again. Ellie is gay, they decided to show her gayness. Perhaps it will play a role in the upcoming game. You make this massive uneducated rant of a post, yet your post above clearly shows that you simply have an issue with a lesbian.
And, yes. Bigotry is bigotry. If history has shown anything, at least in Western civilization is that bigots are frowned upon throughout history. The reality is conversvites have always been socially backwards hence why they wanted to keep slavery, black equality and integration. And judging by the current political climate, things haven't really changed.
@MirkoS77: If she made out with a guy would there be an issue of pushing her sexuality as an agenda?
My previous post addresses this.
What if Joel were making out with a woman stranger, what would you think? What would be the point of showing such a scene considering the rest of the trailer? That he's straight and is looking for a night of action? Sexual orientation is irrelevant to me aside from how it serves the narrative, and when Ellie (or Joel) is just plopped down making out with strangers out of the blue, as I said, it doesn't leave much room other than to shine a (unnecessary) light on their sexuality. There's no relation. There's no history. Nothing. And considering the massive amount of press and praise Left Behind garnered, largely due to that revelation, an agenda is suspect.
Don't mistake me being against agendas as also being a bigot. I'm not.
The OP is a bit silly. If a the game designer wants it to have political themes, there is nothing wrong with that. People mostly just seem to be upset at females and minorities being more NPCs than usual. That's all I've taken away from this. Mostly incels, but who cares what they think.
I think this is more about political agendas than political themes , I guess I didn't specify that in my original comment though
It's fairly obvious that what's you meant.
Heck, the reply even gets, and just contorts it into anyone not liking political agenda as the worst thing humanly possible, baby insults.
Sad.
I never said you had to like political agendas.
I just said that it's fine to openly discuss politics or be political in video games, or movies. It's been done for centuries in other forms of art, even plays.
Also it seems like I touched a nerve. You damn Stacy.
I love when conservatives play the whole "I'm not a bigot, racist, sexist, xenophobe" argument.
Again. Ellie is gay, they decided to show her gayness. Perhaps it will play a role in the upcoming game. You make this massive uneducated rant of a post, yet your post above clearly shows that you simply have an issue with a lesbian.
And, yes. Bigotry is bigotry. If history has shown anything, at least in Western civilization is that bigots are frowned upon throughout history. The reality is conversvites have always been socially backwards hence why they wanted to keep slavery, black equality and integration. And judging by the current political climate, things haven't really changed.
I'm not a conservative, I have gay friends, and I'm certain Ellie's orientation will play a factor......I look forward to it. You completely missed my point, unsurprisingly. My problem isn't one's sexual orientation, it is leveraging it to push an agenda. I want better representation and diversity as well, but what I don't want is for what is desired to be better represented to be trivialized and gutted to a shell in order to be able to do it.
Sure, I'd believe being heavy handed with politics can impact sales. Same goes for philosophy, religion or history. I can't imagine having much fun with an RPG or maybe an RTS that didn't touch on any of those themes, though. I'm definitely not anti-politics in games, films, books or any other media, it's just not easy to do right while pleasing everyone, and pleasing everyone is what AAA pubs keep aiming at.
I don't care if a game has politics or not because I can choose to buy it or not buy it. I lean right but I realize that many people in entertainment whether it be gaming or Hollywood are liberals and it can be difficult to pretend to be neutral when you aren't and sometimes you will see political bias show in someone's work. I have no issues with that.
Now if someone just comes out and says something like "straight white males are all evil and the cause of everything wrong in the world" then yeah I would avoid their work. That's what someone at Bioware who worked on Andromeda basically said and that put me off of buying it even before finding out it was trash anyway.
Throwing a fit over a game because it features a lesbian as the lead character? That's just ridiculous to me. Ellie was awesome in the first TLOU and I'm excited as hell for the sequel.
This is my word of the day! You're right though. Putting a gay kiss in a game outside of any context just makes that scene about sexuality whether it be a straight or gay kiss. So to include an relationship which has only been given purely sexual reference point, then the message is solely about sex itself which could only be considered political if you consider homosexuality itself to be a political issue.
To include homosexuality in your game out of context is clearly pandering to an imaginary audience that find homosexuality innately titillating or outrageous.
It's also pandering to a very real audience who wants it in there for nothing but representation, without a care for how it's being represented. If I were gay, I'd frankly find that trailer a bit offensive in the brevity of its representation, as it's extremely one-dimensional and does not encompass or demonstrate the dynamics of one's sexuality respective to the relationship that brought it about. Far too brief of a time to really pay it proper representation at all.
I love when conservatives play the whole "I'm not a bigot, racist, sexist, xenophobe" argument.
Again. Ellie is gay, they decided to show her gayness. Perhaps it will play a role in the upcoming game. You make this massive uneducated rant of a post, yet your post above clearly shows that you simply have an issue with a lesbian.
And, yes. Bigotry is bigotry. If history has shown anything, at least in Western civilization is that bigots are frowned upon throughout history. The reality is conversvites have always been socially backwards hence why they wanted to keep slavery, black equality and integration. And judging by the current political climate, things haven't really changed.
I'm not a conservative, I have gay friends, and I'm certain Ellie's orientation will play a factor......I look forward to it. You completely missed my point, unsurprisingly. My problem isn't one's sexual orientation, it is leveraging it to push an agenda. I want better representation and diversity as well, but what I don't want is for what is desired to be better represented to be trivialized and gutted to a shell in order to be able to do it.
This is my word of the day! You're right though. Putting a gay kiss in a game outside of any context just makes that scene about sexuality whether it be a straight or gay kiss. So to include an relationship which has only been given purely sexual reference point, then the message is solely about sex itself which could only be considered political if you consider homosexuality itself to be a political issue.
To include homosexuality in your game out of context is clearly pandering to an imaginary audience that find homosexuality innately titillating or outrageous.
It's also pandering to a very real audience who wants it in there for nothing but representation, without a care for how it's being represented. If I were gay, I'd frankly find that trailer a bit offensive in the brevity of its representation, as it's extremely one-dimensional and does not encompass or demonstrate the dynamics of one's sexuality respective to the relationship that brought it about. Far too brief of a time to really pay it proper representation at all.
Sorry, but I'm gay and I don't find it offensive. On the contrary, I'm proud it's inclusive and gets conservatives uptight about seeing to lesbians kissing.
does having a gay couple in your video game make that aspect political?
...
Featuring anything the person is uncomfortable and/or unfamiliar with counts as "jamming it down their throat" or as "an agenda" :P
You know, even despite the fact that gay people do exist and you do encounter them on occasion. Still, if it's in their game and gay people are not part of their worldview, it seems to alienate them.
No offense mrbojangles25, but this is really a lazy argument.
To answer tyrit's question, having a gay character in your game doesn't immediately make that aspect political, no. However, depending on how it's executed .....
I will go back and read more of your post but he hint in asking for an example is to NOT use phrase like.
we dont want hypotheticals, we dont want ifs, we do not want motivations, we want hard core specific concrete examples.
but I will go back and read more
well that didnt take me long
Exactly concretely and specifically HOW does the following happen exactly HOW...be more concrete then you are being, its still abstract. save all the poltical insights for a differnt post, I still havent seen an example explained, maybe I should watch the movie game in order to get an idea but it really should not be required. you should be able to provide an example in concrete
It starts out shoving Ellie's (and another character's) sexual orientation into our faces,
Log in to comment