@straightcur: how can you self censor when you don’t know what the content will be? This right here is an excellent argument for rating and putting content warnings on trailers just like movies do.
So the argument is something like ‘we believe this appeals to a certain audience and if it appeals to some audience it is okay to show it to a captive room of people who may or may not be that audience and to position it prominently on the internet for people to watch as a trailer where no context is given and no attempt is made to warn viewers about the content they will be watching’
With no comment at all about weather or not this is an okay trailer, I can definitively say, that argument is some grade A BS. That attitude does not apply when the audience is not even given an opportunity to self evaluate and decide if they want to watch the content.
If you haven’t noticed, trailers for movies self regulate this. They have both what are called green band and red band trailers (established and assigned by the MPAA, the same entity that will eventually rate the movie). This particular trailer (and the one for Detroit: Become Human) make an excellent argument for regulating game trailers, especially when the people involved in their creation so carelessly argument for their appropriateness. The game industry needs to wise up or they will be going the way of the movies and no event or respectable web site will show or post these trailers unless an organization like the ESA has evaluated their content and added the appropriate ratting (to just the trailer, not to the game).
Great interview! I'm glad you had this recent experience that allowed you to bring some perspective to these issues. I'm also really glad that you asked these questions very fairly and directly. Their answers, on the other hand, are quite disappointing. It's clear from their comments they are just interested in making a high-grossing game that engages xenophobia and racism to make money.
DONTNOD had to deal with some very different but equally sensitive (and potentially offensive) issues in Life is Strange and they did not have to be asked these questions, they addressed them head-on at GDC talking about the care with witch they approached the issues they were grappling with in their game.
DONTNOD did not leave them out or water then down in any way. They maintained a stark reality in these situations by carefully researching the problems, speaking to the experts, grappling with the different ways it could be portrayed and the important details that would communicate the context that leads up to these tense situations. Furthermore, they documented and reported this process clearly to other game companies at GDC this year and other game developers would do well to follow their model.
Seriously? The lead is Witcher III winning game of the year? The most predictable result of the night? We're you at the same awards ceremony? Did you notice that Her Story won 5 awards? FIVE!!!
Thank you for brining a refreshing alternative top 5!! Most (but not all) of the other editors top 5 were just too similar, directed for a very certain type of gamer that I am not. I really gel with your list and was sorry some of these didn't pop up elsewhere in the game-of-the-year series.
Glad to see Rapture and Beginner's Guide at least got some love here. Could have done without the gag awards to those. Kind of shows a lack of respect to those games and I don't think the list above is consistent with that sentiment.
Seriously, the fact that Rapture and Beginner's Guide show up here, with gag awards only, and made no appearance in your platform awards really shows a dramatic shift in the priorities and tastes of your editorial staff. I'm beyond disappointed. The rest of games journalism is leaving you behind Gamespot.
OllieBrown's comments