The two things aren't mutually exclusive. We can hire the best people, and select from as wide a pool as possible so that everyone is given a chance.
Cuz capital consumerism isn't about taking risks it's about making money. It's easier to make money from shit people already know about. Why do you think we get a COD every year?
And on top of that it's a first person shooter so for all that character's race, religion, sex, etc, the character is just a floating gun.
There is nothing wrong with diversity if happens naturally, for example for Bloodborne music they brought up western composers for their talents not just for sake of just having "diversity".
Oh i'm not saying diversity is wrong. I'm just saying that the notion that it's inherently good should at least have some supporting evidence. So far it seems we're just supposed to accept that it's something great that we should strive for. I'm skeptic, even more so when it seems they're trying to make meritocracy a bad word
Kinda ironic given that 4 and 5 were definitely prequel trilogy tier.
I never understood people that demand characters look like their real-life selves. The ones that "can't relate" to characters that don't match their gender, color, orientation, etc have a lot more problems than the diversity of the cast in video games.
When I have the option to create my own character, I tend to build something new. Why would I want to play myself in a game when it's a lifetime of playing as myself I'm trying to escape from? I'm typically a gender benderr. Chicks usually have better hair and clothing options. Men have cooler beards and mustaches. Now in the age of wokeness, games (like those from Ubi) have gotten rid of the "male/female" option and instead use a "body type" scale. So I can be a chick with nice hair, nice clothes, and a nice beard. Win/Win/Win
This
mckmas8808
said... Merit, in this country, has almost never existed for so-called minorities... And that goes especially for Silicon Valley and many tech companies.
That's always been at the core of the games.
Nope Cortana/Chief was a side plot at best in Bungie's games. In all the games they made there is literally only one mission focused on Cortana and not the war. I don't know how you can think the emphasis on their relationship is the core of Bungie's games.
It's core to Halo 3 at least, where the majority of the game is spent trying to rescue Cortana, and fulfil your promise to her made at the end of Halo 2 .
I would compare with a game like Gears of War 3. The objective is to end the war, like both previous games. But the only way you can do that is to rescue your father and fire the weapon he built. Just like the only way to end the war with the Flood and the Gravemind is to use Cortana's index. The majority of the objectives you actually complete have little to do with the overall goal (power this generator, find this spare part, locate more fuel, defend this lobby). But re-uniting with your father is one of the key emotional arcs of the game.
It's impossible for me to deny the positives from doing this as you pointed out. I do think it carries the risk of turning off more existing customers than it attracts new ones though. For me personally, I find it odd and a bit worrisome that I know very little about the game after a lackluster reveal, yet the dev is promoting its diversity in making it already. It feels like a cheap pop in wrestling, when some low tier superstar gets the crowd to cheer for them by shouting out the name of the city.
That's because that's not a guarantee. Everyone still need to show what they've got."Diversity attracts diversity." Such a redundant statement.
Notice she didn't say, "diversity attracts talent."
