Why do Gamers whine so much about progressive themes on games?

they should just not buy it and STFU frankly.

yeah I get free speech and all that but they dont just do that do they? no. they DEMAND developers stop doing it. that is different

actually no its far worse, they DEMAND developers stop doing things that they ARENT EVEN DOING IN THE FIRST PLACE!

they LIE about what developers are doing, flat out friggin lie

@tryit: Id hate to inform you but a large portion of the gaming community leans right. If you know they hate political agendas being pushed its hard to see how the left leaning gamers would buy games simply to spite them.

you might be right I dont know the numbers I actually would like to know the numbers, one gamers specifically. population at large real conservative views is a minority

Gravity is also a theory, but I don't imagine you are anchoring yourself to the ground preparing for it to turn off unexpectedly.

your theory is based less of facts then my theory.

regardless, I still think its absurd, I think its more absurd then the theory of mass manipulation by a 'deep state'.

i also think your view of the world is very sad.

@loganx77: There's no such thing as "the gaming community"

Yeah, that's what I was saying, don't buy it and move on. But if asked why you aren't interested, state why, it should be accepted.

not if the reasoning is based on a lie.

which it is most of the time on this specific point

and also dont be shocked when you tell someone 'I am offended by progressives forcing developers to have female leads' that people at best roll their eyes and try to walk away from you

@toast_burner: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaming_community

I don't care if its based on a lie or not, if you aren't interested, you aren't interested, just don't be a jerk about it, and people shouldn't be jerks because you aren't interested. It really is that simple.

As far as I can tell you don't actually have a theory, you're just upset with mine.

Also yes it is a sad view of the world but that's because life isn't going to be all the time sunshine and roses and the sooner you accept that the better. If you would like I could link you a picture of a kitten to make you feel better.

well I agree somewhat.

I mean you as a person SHOULD care if your choice of not buying something is based on a lie. but I get your point otherwise.

no I have two theories.

nobody has asked me what my theories are, I perfer not to explain because they are a bit too complex for a gaming web forum to really digest which is why I dont give them without being asked explictly at min.

why would you see your view of humanity as 'sad' if its how we are naturally to begin with? think about that for a second. it would mean that our nature is to be disgusted with ourselves. kinda odd

Okay then why are you still debating this here?

Also it's sad in that conflict and strife are inherent and there's nothing you can do to make them go away, because without them, life becomes meaningless.

are you making the case for the enjoyment of violence?

not sure what you are saying (dont worry about my motivation for debate, if you want to know my theories ask)

I agree with that, but beyond that, if someone one isn't hurting someone else, then let pigs roll in the mud they choose.

I am saying it is human nature, as most negative behavior is, and I think it's dumb to assume people enjoy violent content because they are inherently, one-dimensionally horrible.

let me ask you this.

If I told you in 2016 that the Russians are trying to influence our election with the explicit objective of causing division do that the people and the government would be less effective would you have called me a tin foil hat wearer?

@loganx77: Did you even follow your own link? It supports what I was saying. Gaming community just redirects to gamer which is a term so broad it's meaningless.

You say most gamers lean right, but who's right? The vast majority of gamers are not American so they obviously won't be American right, and French right would be seen as leftist by American standards. What you're doing is a even worse repeat of your "other people agree with me so I must be right" argument that you attempted earlier. It's still a fallacy no matter how you phrase it.

Maybe not in the past tense, but in this moment, sure. There is evidence that could be the case, but I fail to see what that has to do with the points I was making. I feel like you are asking more to satisfy some unforeseen conspiracy angle, and less because it's directly relevant to what I was saying.

its more about the points I am about to make.

would you then agree that keeping a population in a divisive state is a way to possibly manipulate a population to your advantage?

If you keep them isolated you can control the narrative, one way to keep them emotionally and mentally isolated is to create a divisive culture.

that is basically why nation states do that.

Because gaming media(Reviews,news) has taught gamers to be whiny .

I assure you, I am on the edge of my seat waiting to see where this goes.

well...

if we know for a FACT that governments use propaganda techniques against adversaries explicitly for the purposes of keeping people in a divisive state

why are we shocked when someone suggest that is happening?

I'm not sure anyone is actually shocked that this happens so much as pissed. But please, enough of the foreplay already.

so....why is the idea that that maybe you are under the influence of psychological propaganda far more then you are aware sound so crazy? when we know they do it!

I am very literally saying 'maybe they are doing what we know they are doing'

So what you're saying is the government is brainwashing us into our enjoyment of conflict and violence.

How dull, I was really hoping this was going to be aliens.

not exactly

I am saying its possible that someone or group (no idea if its specifically government or companies or what) are trying to put us into a state of complicity by the psychological manipulation of violence and lots of negativity.

NOW...regarding 'make us like' I have something different to say to that but I need to give you some examples. But in short its 'if something is not on the buffet how do you know you would not like it more?'

1. Now that I am older and have been exposed to all matters of stories and moral challenges I now have more than once found myself more engaged in listening to a person on a video talk to me about his dog then I have a big block buster hit movie. but 10 years ago not having much access to people talking about their dog I would not have known that. All I knew is what was offered, violence is all that was offered, so its all I liked.

2. last night I was watching a show about this black man who came back from the war, well in Europe blacks at that time were treated just like everyone else (ww2). He had no idea that white people could actually be nice. so again, if its not on the buffet table how do you know you dont like it more?

so if violence is the only new thing on TV how do you know its really what you perfer?

Now..I think this theory as I laid out is one of two possibility. I am not saying 'its how it is' i dont know for sure. I try to be careful about declaring something as fact, even more so when I dont have to.

to make my case on TV, let me ask you this

have you seen Better Call Saul? or Goliath? two highly engaged extreemly good dramas, no violence, no excessive negativity really

Oh so this actually is better than government conspiracy, we've upgraded to some sort of illuminati shit.

try reading more than the first line

now its more likely the second theory and not the above but the above has been prooven to be accurate when it comes to marketing on TV when it comes to keeping intelligence level down and targeting youth because its easier to sell that way.

the second theory is just that, that I am 50 years old looking at Netflix which is likely targeting rather young people who are still fascinated by the shock value of violence and given its a forumla that works just like the 'if its not on the buffet how to dyou know' then its just a formula they never bother to question.

but I can tell you, I dont like violence, I dont dream about it, I dont wish I could do it, its not part of my nature, and I am human, so no I dont believe your wacky theory either

I did read past the first line but there wasn't much point, the first line said all that really needs to be said, the rest is filler. You have become fixated on a theory that human interest in violent impulses and violent media is produced by said media, and assumed some shadow organization is behind it. What more is there to read into?

but if i said 'goverment' then the rest would have been fine

ok ...believe me when I say this i was NOT elluding to any other group. BECAUSE I dont know who is why I said I dont know who, no intent to elude to some other group I dont believe most of that stuff.

in its very basic terms you are saying this

'although I know Russians did exactly what you are saying and exactly for the same reason I do not believe Hollywood does'

that is it in a nutsheel.

that said, it might be that the general population just dosent have the intelligence enough to enjoy good drama and they need a lot of flash bangs to stay awake..it could be that.

but its NOT...that you dream and jerk off to the idea of killing people.

So does the theory say anything about the world starting only 100 years ago? I am interested in that side of the theory.

oh hell NO!

again:

'although we know Russians did exactly what I am saying and exactly for the same reason you do not believe Hollywood does'

vs

we all go home and jerk off to the idea of killing people because its in a nature

which is more absurd to you?

can I get you to at least admit that we do not go all home salivating over the idea of murdering people? because for me that is all I wanted to convey today

@Vaasman

based on your replies I think below is more likely then that of people dreaming of murdering each other.

that said, it might be that the general population just dosent have the intelligence enough to enjoy good drama and they need a lot of flash bangs to stay awake..it could be that.

Na I think I've seen enough. This has been very enlightening though and I thank you for that.

I am going with Occam's Razor on this:

that said, it might be that the general population just dosent have the intelligence enough to enjoy good drama and they need a lot of flash bangs to stay awake..it could be that.

that is the theory I am sticking with, not sure what got over me eariler

I should never forget, when two possibilities exist always go with the most 'they are just stupid' answer when talking about the general population sad to say

Yea like the Daily Mail created that saying....

@MBirdy88: If not the Daily Fail, then where else did it originate from?

@toast_burner: My link says

"The community of gamers as a whole, part of video game culture."

Its exactly what i meant by gaming community.

Second of all i never said the "MAJORITY" of gamers lean right. I said a large portion do. You also completely misinterpreted my argument. I don't think political pandering of any type helps in games. You shouldn't try to piss off any group of gamers to push an agenda. Thats the only argument im making.

When it's forced because of progressive movements that don't understand how ratio's work. Outside of that, few these days have time to give a crap about the sexuality or race of others. When they do it's usually political but if you noticed, there are not too many LGBT's out there robbing banks and stealing cars ala GTA 5 style so if you wanted to mirror reality in a way that makes logic for the player then you wouldn't have a 65 yr old guy who dresses like a woman for example.. Progressives don't understand the ratio's for a given area. For example, how many men are secretaries vs women? How many white people live in middle America vs any other race? Before stats can matter, you have to factor in the ratio's and while it's perfectly fine to play as a biological female that thinks she is a male, it needs to fit the role of the character. Not forced due to fears or political movements.

But also notice no one is saying anything for games where you play as a non-human. Does the character speak like a white male? Is Star Fox a male that feels like a woman inside?...no one asks those questions because they don't care, the character fits the role.

@loganx77: so that would mean that the majority lean left.

And seeing how you seem to think pissing people off simply means not catering to them specifically, that would mean it would be for the best for developers to focus on a left wing demographic.

GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!

trust me when I say this, 'progressives' are not going to make a video game in which the vast majority of what you do is kill people.

They are not going to hire a team to create a great combat engine, they are not going to hire a team to make awesome gun models

get your heads out of your %^&*!!!!!!!

the only reason they do it is the same reason Marylin Manson dresses like he does, it creates contraversy which draws attention.

jesus H!!!!!!

@toast_burner: I didnt say that either and no thats not what that would mean.

The vast majority of gamers most likely don't give a shit about politics. If you are saying leftwing gamers demand to be force fed sjw bullshit to enjoy their games that may be true. However the vast majority don't feel that way. Developers should make a good game and not try to pander to anyone. That seems to have worked best in the past.

dude.

trust me when I say a sjw progressive is never going to make a video game in which you as the character primary task is to kill people.

they are not going to hire a staff to create a bunch of gun models and combat engine.

developers just respond to contraversy of the day because it generates attention and sales.

I've never played a game and thought, 'God these liberal themes are irritating me', or the opposite with right leaning themes. What I tend to see are little children throwing tantrums over female leads, or the thought that maybe games should evolve and move away from rigid stereotypes that they've employed for decades.

Let's be honest, a large portion of the gaming community is toxic and shitty, and it's the portion complaining about having women clothed properly in games.

In a game like Wolfenstein its over the top anyways. But in something like CoD it would be nice to see them portrayed realistically. Many Nazis didn't have much of a choice. If you were a man of fighting age in Germany you had three choices. Fight for the Nazis, flee the country, or get captured and put into a concentration camp.

@loganx77: That's pretty much my point. SJW bullshit is not being forced into games, you're just imagining it.

Other than games made for a niche, they're all made to appeal to as much people as possible. Which is why games like Mass Effect aren't limited to just pandering to straight men.

also we should think about these two points

1. if violence in games does not affect behavior why would we think finding out one of the lead characters is gay would have any impact on how we think?

2. if any video game character is protrayed as gay for any reason at all. even just 'i am gay' 'ok your gay' its considered a SJW agenda. that is the same thing as saying they are outraged that a lead is gay because there is literally no way to make the lead gay without them loosinng their minds

@tryit: pretty much. I always hear people say that they're ok with gay characters as long as they're not shoe horned in, but they never explain what they mean by that and they continue to complain about every single mention of a character being gay. All while ignoring characters obviously added to appease the sexual appetites of horny straight male teenagers