With sports and sims I would say EA.
@djura said:
At the risk of getting sucked into a vortex of bullshit, I'd just say that the original question is not correctly phrased. The question isn't about which company caters to so-called "SJWs"; I think the question is which company actively seeks to increase representation of various types of people within their games.
And honestly, I'm not really sure which of those I'd put in that category. I think most of the industry is trying to create more diverse characters in general. Off the top of my head, Sony comes to mind as a fairly big proponent of this - especially if you think about their support of games starring female protagonists.
Well... very few games contain characters that are meant to represent people in the real world. EA games do sometimes, like their sports titles. They have to pay for the right to put famous people's faces in the game. And there have been some games based on history like BF1 where they use names of real soldiers that died. Or Saboteur that takes place during ww2 in a halfway realistic world in a halfway realistic France. So I suppose they could halfway realistically represent French people but within the boundaries of what is doable in such a game and keeping it entertaining because that's the whole point of the game.
I would look mostly at edutainment or simulators set in a time and place with diversity for representation of real people. If we're talking math-games for kids it would be cool to have children of several backgrounds learning maths within the game. And I do consider it an important component of a simulator that focuses on citizens in modern day Brussels. But I don't fully understand the people asking for representation in all games. In a game like The Witcher (1 mostly) Geralt isn't supposed to be the player he is an established character in the lore and in a fantasy world with his own opinions and personality. Of course there are also games in which the main character supposedly represents the player. (In Witcher 3 more so but still not quite.) Or that give you the choice (Skyrim). If character customization wouldn't cost a ton of skill, money and time to make then I would want to see every game that has a character representing the player to a significant degree to have the option for at least skin tones and maybe voice tones. But that's a hefty thing to ask for. Besides the resources it takes it makes it harder to market the game since you don't have a recognizable protagonist in the game, and the protagonist could never become iconic (Lara Croft would not exist and would not be beloved). (Somehow Mass Effect kind of made it work so I would like to read into that but that was also white manshep/femshep.) I would love for that to become more common though for the people who like that sort of thing, and I think it is becoming more common like you are saying.
But of course representation is not just the looks but also the skills and decisions the character makes, the behaviors, the movements, the way of thinking, the cultural background and the economical background and so many things that will never be perfectly in line with the person playing (and the player probably doesn't want all of this to be in his/her game in the first place) so we would have to seriously establish a line of what is deemed acceptable for people who are very sensitive to this type of thing (if the game wants to sell to that group of people), and we have to come to terms with that coming at a price.
Log in to comment