Support NeoGAF

[mckmas8808]

1. What part about the short term results should the developers specifically care about?
2. Do the short term results lead to long term consequences? If so, explain and show evidence.
3. Are the results repeatable consistently? How do you know that the methodology that was used eliminates the probability of high variance?

Maybe the developers themselves care about it. If certain people on the dev team or enough of them care about it, shouldn't they be allowed to follow through on that within their game? And by it, I'm talking about not in a lazy way use typical stereotypes as characters in their game.

That's how it should be - you always hire best people for the work without looking at gender, race, religion, etc.

Sadly that's not how it's working at the moment in the business world.

 

[The Mad Draklor]

Maybe the developers themselves care about it. If certain people on the dev team or enough of them care about it, shouldn't they be allowed to follow through on that within their game? And by it, I'm talking about not in a lazy way use typical stereotypes as characters in their game.

This... doesn't even address a single one of my questions. It's almost like you quoted the wrong person.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Has video of what seemingly ubisoft employees watch

 

[Spukc]

I don't care about anita.
And i don't care about ubi.

Seems like a match made in heaven.
Good luck wasting your time on discussing this shit.

 

[Schrödinger's cat]

Complete and blatant lie. Classical example of a women playing freemium games on average 5 minutes a day is being compared 50/50 to guys playing any video game on average 3 hours a day. That is apparently a 50/50 divide to these people doing these statistics. Look at audience at gaming conventions, look at tourament players and the audience at these places, look at the lines in front of a game store every time something major is being announced, look at YouTube channels covering games. How big percentage of these are men compared to women? That's the reflection of gamers.

Apologies if this has already been posted (or refuted):

https://quanticfoundry.com/2017/01/19/female-gamers-by-genre/

The study is from Jan 2017, so figures may be somewhat inaccurate in today's post-Fortnite landscape.

 

[Stealth_Cobra]

Some of you guys are really dense.

There's like a gazillion different powerpoint presentations everyday in these game companies, made by tons of individuals with different genders, views , orientations and beliefs. Because a single , out of context leaked slide that mentions stuff that can be controversial (LGBT and gender representation, racism, social justice warriors, anita sarkesian, stereotypes, tropes, prejudices, etc), everybody is acting like the whole company is evil because... Sigh... They are actually trying to understand and study these trends and the documentation in hopes of making games that do not go against how gaming has been evolving and the new sensibilities of gamers and reviewers.

Sure, let's boycott a game company because they try to make their games more respectful and inclusive. Game companies should be stuck in the 1990s and producing duke nukem games because apparently that's all allowed to think about... Can't be studying different opinions and try to make games that are more inclusive.

Sorry, but even if you disagree with the messenger (for example Sarkeesian), you can still respect the fact game companies are looking an the data, at what's happening in the industry and trying to make games that aren't totally out of touch with what is expected of games nowadays. We live in an industry where we get frequent reviews by transgender and LGBT reviewers and it seems there's a pretty pro SJW agenda in a big portion of the gaming media, at the very least any company that make games in this day and age should consider the data and views that are being expressed.

Companies are making games for everyone, meaning they want to be inclusive and not offend players of different believes and identities. The fact they ask the question of gender representation, stereotypes etc should be a good thing, and the fack they cite existing sources should not be seen as a rallying cry, but as citing current idea trends and conceptions. Just because you cite Sarkeesian doesn't mean you fully embrace her views, and just because you consider the fact your userbase is diverse doesn't mean you will forever change your design to be 100% inclusive, you'll just try to keep in mind more point of views and design games that don't offend a huge portion of your potential userbase.

 

[Moneal]

Sorry, but even if you disagree with the messenger (for example Sarkeesian), you can still respect the fact game companies are looking an the data, at what's happening in the industry and trying to make games that aren't totally out of touch with what is expected of games nowadays. We live in an industry where we get frequent reviews by transgender and LGBT reviewers and it seems there's a pretty pro SJW agenda in a big portion of the gaming media, at the very least any company that make games in this day and age should consider the data and views that are being expressed.

were is the data they are looking at. every bit of data out there shows that games that don't adhere to the sjw agenda do just fine.

 

[Bakkus]

The study is from Jan 2017, so figures may be somewhat inaccurate in today's post-Fortnite landscape.

To be fair, I wish these statistics actually were true, because if it was, then it would actually be possible for me to talk to most women about this subject. I don't know a single one who has any interest in video games other than playing freemium games on their phone. Oh, I knew one who was slightly in to the Pokemon GO craze in the summer 2 years ago...

Nintendo, definitely the most female friendly developer among the big 3 had this survey last year.

 

[mckmas8808]

This... doesn't even address a single one of my questions. It's almost like you quoted the wrong person.

It's a refusal to answer any of your questions because they don't matter. Seriously they don't! At the end of the day if developers want to focus on not using overly stereotypical characters because they don't want to add to that type of influence, then that should be fine. It's not as if it's a terrible thing for them to care about.

 

[petran79]

Apologies if this has already been posted (or refuted):

https://quanticfoundry.com/2017/01/19/female-gamers-by-genre/

The study is from Jan 2017, so figures may be somewhat inaccurate in today's post-Fortnite landscape.

Post was about percentage, so this survey confirms it.

Alongside gaming motivations, we also collect data on demographic variables. In our full sample, 18.5% are female gamers. We also ask gamers to list specific game titles/franchises that they enjoy playing (up to 9). By sampling gamers who mention a specific game title/franchise, we can generate a profile of that game's engaged audience. Note that the data we have is limited to the favorite games listed by a gamer–they are likely playing more games than they are able to list, but this constraint holds true for all respondents in our data, whether male or female.

Some of you guys are really dense.

There's like a gazillion different powerpoint presentations everyday in these game companies, made by tons of individuals with different genders, views , orientations and beliefs. Because a single , out of context leaked slide that mentions stuff that can be controversial (LGBT and gender representation, racism, social justice warriors, anita sarkesian, stereotypes, tropes, prejudices, etc), everybody is acting like the whole company is evil because... Sigh... They are actually trying to understand and study these trends and the documentation in hopes of making games that do not go against how gaming has been evolving and the new sensibilities of gamers and reviewers.

Sure, let's boycott a game company because they try to make their games more respectful and inclusive. Game companies should be stuck in the 1990s and producing duke nukem games because apparently that's all allowed to think about... Can't be studying different opinions and try to make games that are more inclusive.

Sorry, but even if you disagree with the messenger (for example Sarkeesian), you can still respect the fact game companies are looking an the data, at what's happening in the industry and trying to make games that aren't totally out of touch with what is expected of games nowadays. We live in an industry where we get frequent reviews by transgender and LGBT reviewers and it seems there's a pretty pro SJW agenda in a big portion of the gaming media, at the very least any company that make games in this day and age should consider the data and views that are being expressed.

Games should worry first and foremost about the content and mechanics of the game. Inclusive but shallow games will not be remembered as much.

 

[TLZ]

she is a massively popular personality

 

[mckmas8808]

Games should worry first and foremost about the content and mechanics of the game. Inclusive but shallow games will not be remembered as much.

So what if a game does both? Why are people acting as if a game that's inclusive, can't be deep and interesting?

 

[donutkirby]

I'll never understand the drive to buy something to annoy someone else.

Throwing away my money on something I probably won't like to own the gamers

 

[Moneal]

It's a refusal to answer any of your questions because they don't matter. Seriously they don't! At the end of the day if developers want to focus on not using overly stereotypical characters because they don't want to add to that type of influence, then that should be fine. It's not as if it's a terrible thing for them to care about.

it depends why they want to focus on it. are they doing it because there is data that they are issues, or are they doing it because people like Anita pushing that they are issues? if its the first, and the data doesn't support the idea then no they shouldn't, and I don't think that is why they are doing it. if its the second, they are being mislead, and taking time to focus on something that isn't an issue.

 

[mckmas8808]

it depends why they want to focus on it. are they doing it because there is data that they are issues, or are they doing it because people like Anita pushing that they are issues? if its the first, and the data doesn't support the idea then no they shouldn't, and I don't think that is why they are doing it. if its the second, they are being mislead, and taking time to focus on something that isn't an issue.

Okay well........never having a black or gay character in a game isn't an issue that will make the world completely worse off. But adding black and gay characters in games will make the world better. Would you agree to that? Or would you need to see a study for that statement first before you could answer?

 

[Cosmogony]

Some of you guys are really dense.

You are certainly off to a great start.

Sure, let's boycott a game company because they try to make their games more respectful and inclusive.

It's people's money and leisure time. Should they act according to your opinions, then? If so, why not the reverse, why not you acting according to theirs? Would you like that?

Maybe if you would bother to make an effort, something in the vicinity of an argument, maybe you could win some people.

Game companies should be stuck in the 1990s and producing duke nukem games because apparently that's all allowed to think about...

Evidently, one is allowed to think what you so graciously allow one to think, because you, unlike the rest, keep up with the times and are here to debrief and update the rest. Companies can do what they want. Gamers can do what they want. Companies can make games I don't like or emboss political views I don't agree with on them. In turn, I can criticize them, can opt not to buy their games. It's all entirely voluntary, from both parties.

So what seems to be the problem again?

Can't be studying different opinions and try to make games that are more inclusive.

It could. The slide though seems more assertive than that.
Regardless, I reject the concept of representation in fiction and likewise reject the idea of inclusivity in fiction.

Sorry, but even if you disagree with the messenger (for example Sarkeesian), you can still respect

I can but I don't. Rerspect is like money. I don't go around throwing undeserved money at people.

the fact game companies are looking an the data, at what's happening in the industry and trying to make games that aren't totally out of touch with what is expected of games nowadays.

Ah, so you do have an argument. It goes like this:
"Games should be more inclusive because these days games are expected to be more inclusive."

Fantastic argument. I'm sold. Tell me, if, for whatever reason, the wind turns, and what is expected from games changes back to, mythically, white straight males only, you wouldn't raise objections, would you? Because that would be what would be expected from games.

We live in an industry where we get frequent reviews by transgender and LGBT reviewers and it seems there's a pretty pro SJW agenda in a big portion of the gaming media,

Are you suggesting these reviewers might not review the game based off on its quality but rather on self-serving terms, on whether it features this or that minority character or not? How fair does that sound to you? And what would you call capitulating to blatant unfairness?

 

[Moneal]

Okay well........never having a black or gay character in a game isn't an issue that will make the world completely worse off. But adding black and gay characters in games will make the world better. Would you agree to that? Or would you need to see a study for that statement first before you could answer?

nice strawman. This was not about inclusion it was about tropes and stereotypes. Are the tropes and stereotypes bad? As I mentioned earlier, they can both be bad if overused or just thrown in. Did anyone complain when Carl Johnson was the main character of GTA San Andres? No, Carl was a great character, as was Franklin.

 

[Dunki]

So what if a game does both? Why are people acting as if a game that's inclusive, can't be deep and interesting?

It is pretty easy. Because to be inclusive you have to make compromises in terms of stories, events and even characterization. For example in Anita's works a women who is shy in media is a negative for her. These days all you get in western video games are strong independent women. There isnothing else allowed anymore. Be it a Lara, be it an Alloy Cassandra from Odessey etc they are basically the same characters with the same personalitites. Meanwhile in Japanese games you have a huge variety of female characters. Are many of them tropes and stereotypes? Yes but they also feel way more real because they also have flaws.

Honestly I am bored of female characters in Western games. They are boring and predictable.

 

[NickFire]

So what if a game does both? Why are people acting as if a game that's inclusive, can't be deep and interesting?

You raise an incredibly fair and valid point. Games absolutely can be both (all three, whatever). It's a shame when that message is lost. A lot of gamers, myself included at times, have just had enough with the non-stop agenda pushing and holier than thou claims that anyone who disagrees, or is simply sick of hearing about it, are ist this, ist that. You cannot escape it if you pay attention to the industry, will get banned from online places just for having everyday normal thoughts, and god forbid if you disagree and are part of the industry. Then its time for a sacrifice.

Anyway, I like to give the benefit of the doubt, and really think most people who comment on these issues are pushing back against the culture that created this firestorm, and not actually advocating for less represented people as characters, protagonists, etc.

 

[zeorhymer]

Okay well........never having a black or gay character in a game isn't an issue that will make the world completely worse off. But adding black and gay characters in games will make the world better. Would you agree to that? Or would you need to see a study for that statement first before you could answer?

Please just stop. Everything that I've read from you is just spouting fallacies. Even this you're putting the burden of proof which you have no intention of continuing the discussion.

What is your stance? From what I've been reading, there's a whole lot of nothing.

 

[Dunki]

Okay well........never having a black or gay character in a game isn't an issue that will make the world completely worse off. But adding black and gay characters in games will make the world better. Would you agree to that? Or would you need to see a study for that statement first before you could answer?

NO it does not make the game better. Does him/her being gay add anything to the story? I actually hate characters like that. Many of these Bioware does this really well are just characters, you will have he black character, you will have the gay character mabye put some trans character in it as well. But these characters have only one reason to exist and this is beause of these traits.

You know what was an actually great gay character? Bill in the LAst of Us. Because it was NEVER about him being gay. He was an character who happens o be gay. When I look at Bioware games for example I can tell you in 2 minutes if this character is gay or not. Hell they even have a Trans character in Andromeda that tells you in the first few minutes of the first encounter that he/she is trans. Like it was the only purpose this character even did exist....

So mabye if you like Token Characters, bad writing and forced diversity then maybe yes the world is a bit better.

If characters exist to only mark a checklist than you fail as a writer and director.

 

[oagboghi2]

Real life is the evidence dude. Remember I live in America. Do stereotypes in games and any form of media make a person go from normal to a racist? No. But it does reinforce those beliefs if someone already has them. NeoGaf and other forums and Twitter prove this. No need for a research study to show the obvious.

Yeah who needs research and data. We have anecdotal evidence and our biases to lead us.

Thankfully Ubisoft is here to save us from ourselves

 

[The Mad Draklor]

It's a refusal to answer any of your questions because they don't matter. Seriously they don't!

Then you are effectively arguing in bad faith. You are regressing to your same old habits of handwaving dismissal without further elaboration. This is what you posted earlier (emphasis is mine):

So lets say the results were short term and not long term. Does that mean no developers should care about this?

These were the questions I asked:

1. What part about the short term results should the developers specifically care about?
2. Do the short term results lead to long term consequences? If so, explain and show evidence.
3. Are the results repeatable consistently? How do you know that the methodology that was used eliminates the probability of high variance?

You are basically avoiding my questions whose purpose is to prod further specificity from your side. Saying that they don't matter do not make them so.

At the end of the day if developers want to focus on not using overly stereotypical characters because they don't want to add to that type of influence, then that should be fine. It's not as if it's a terrible thing for them to care about.

At the end of the day if developers want to [use] stereotypical characters because they [feel like it], then that should be fine. It's not as if [there is empirical evidence that using stereotypical characters enforce longterm negative perspectives of other ethnic groups].

Yeah who needs research and data. We have anecdotal evidence and our biases to lead us.

Thankfully Ubisoft is here to save us from ourselves

Yep, let us ignore the parts where we have to:

1. Collect data in an unbiased way as much as possible.
2. Properly analyze the data, i.e. what is the statistical significance, what is the error of margin, how much variance is there in the results?
3. Make sure that the results are repeatable, i.e. what you found wasn't a fluke.

Proper data analysis. Who needs that?

 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

Some of you guys are really dense.

There's like a gazillion different powerpoint presentations everyday in these game companies, made by tons of individuals with different genders, views , orientations and beliefs. Because a single , out of context leaked slide that mentions stuff that can be controversial (LGBT and gender representation, racism, social justice warriors, anita sarkesian, stereotypes, tropes, prejudices, etc), everybody is acting like the whole company is evil because... Sigh... They are actually trying to understand and study these trends and the documentation in hopes of making games that do not go against how gaming has been evolving and the new sensibilities of gamers and reviewers.

Sure, let's boycott a game company because they try to make their games more respectful and inclusive. Game companies should be stuck in the 1990s and producing duke nukem games because apparently that's all allowed to think about... Can't be studying different opinions and try to make games that are more inclusive.

Sorry, but even if you disagree with the messenger (for example Sarkeesian), you can still respect the fact game companies are looking an the data, at what's happening in the industry and trying to make games that aren't totally out of touch with what is expected of games nowadays. We live in an industry where we get frequent reviews by transgender and LGBT reviewers and it seems there's a pretty pro SJW agenda in a big portion of the gaming media, at the very least any company that make games in this day and age should consider the data and views that are being expressed.

Companies are making games for everyone, meaning they want to be inclusive and not offend players of different believes and identities. The fact they ask the question of gender representation, stereotypes etc should be a good thing, and the fack they cite existing sources should not be seen as a rallying cry, but as citing current idea trends and conceptions. Just because you cite Sarkeesian doesn't mean you fully embrace her views, and just because you consider the fact your userbase is diverse doesn't mean you will forever change your design to be 100% inclusive, you'll just try to keep in mind more point of views and design games that don't offend a huge portion of your potential userbase.

There's plenty of evidence that these things are not isolated. The groups pushing this aren't the people who become content by being heard. It's a power play.

The social justice thing is a game of racketeering. You're right, its in the press a lot but your costumer likely stopped reading that press. The press only exist as part of the racketeering. An activist makes X an issue, either via something like Anita Sarkeesian or via a press article. This issue X is then repeated through other press. This creates a PR problem for the company. Then the people who are spending this effort to create issue X then tell you if you let in an Anita or other "adviser" then it will be the start of addressing the problem. Of course this adviser will be charging to meet you. You let the adviser get influence. You change hiring practices to hire some activist friends. You change "culture" and you really only do this to call off the dogs of the social justice tribe.

Simplified: We call you sexist and organize hit piece barrages on your company, and we only stop if you pay a fee to our friend here. The adviser money is pretty much a protection fee.

And these groups aren't interested in games for everyone. Every single time you hear inclusivity and diversity, there's someone or some thing they talk about removing, excluding and kicking out. They aren't making connect three games for boys. They're pushing male characters out of open world games.

Also, "existing sources " does not equate to valid information. These slides cite implicit bias training which is junk pseudoscience.

edit: I should add that the sentiment that the employees won't care is probably valid. Like a don't do drugs special video taken in class which all the kids ignore a few years down the road. People will gloss over it, but my point is that the groups behind these sort of slides are not like some corny school counselor. They have larger plans.

 

[VulcanRaven]

I don't see what the big deal is. People are overreacting.

 

[RoyBrown7777]

Does she even like games?

I blame this woman for Mario Kart no longer showing lap times.

 

[The Alien]

Ok. People in big organizations write all kinds of documents, saying all kinds of things. I'll be interested to know who the source of the quote is (their position) and the context. I don't want to jump to any conclusions about what "Ubisoft" thinks. It could be a single sentence in some obscure document.

The Quartering actually posted a subtitled video of the Ubisoft presentation. It's more than a sentence or one single pic. It talks about diversity, etc. Its a corporate HR orientation video (that I suppose Quartering is claiming is propaganda).

 

[Humdinger]

The Quartering actually posted a subtitled video of the Ubisoft presentation. It's more than a sentence or one single pic. It talks about diversity, etc. Its a corporate HR orientation video (that I suppose Quartering is claiming is propaganda).

I see. Thanks for clarifying.

An HR department got something wrong. Go figure. HR is staffed with people who don't know crap (apologies to anyone in HR).

 

[Sakura Doritos]

I don't want politics of the world to make it into my game unless the story arc is about the politics of the world or an allegory to it.

I don't want to support developers who are more interested in pushing the lack of diversity of thought when they should be looking to raising the pay and lowering the developer churn and burnout in their industry.

These people have a misguided understanding of what customers and employees want at large. A few racist fucks want to tone and thought police others while people want to express their art and pay their mortgage. Oh yeah and spend time with their families.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

So what if a game does both? Why are people acting as if a game that's inclusive, can't be deep and interesting?

Problem is many of these activists talk about inclusivity because they believe a person can't connect or show empathy unless they see a certain skin color or gender, they don't seem to realize people can see others as humans and connect and relate even to those of other races and genders. This inability to look past external characteristics makes some unable to write interesting characters, merely creating characters that are empty vessels only defined by their sexuality, gender or racial appearance.

Okay well........never having a black or gay character in a game isn't an issue that will make the world completely worse off. But adding black and gay characters in games will make the world better. Would you agree to that? Or would you need to see a study for that statement first before you could answer?

In most games a character's gender and sexuality won't be discussed much if at all. They could be gay, transsexual, etc. Isn't this supposed to be normal? Developers shouldn't make a big show of a character being gay or transsexual, unless the story calls for it in an organic and meaningful manner to the story.

Black characters and minorities can be added if it makes sense to the story. But it is not like if for whatever reason the majority are men or women, or black or asian, like that will keep people from relating. They are all human, a minor quirk like skin color is not that different from wanting someone with a big nose or red hair. Unless we are postulating that there is something more besides minor differences that make certain minorities special and different.

I see. Thanks for clarifying.

An HR department got something wrong. Go figure. HR is staffed with people who don't know crap (apologies to anyone in HR).

The problem is if the HR department becomes corrupted, it is the gateway to the rest of the company. And some companies once they've been filled with enough activists, they will not stop even if they drive the company to bankruptcy.

 

[Thiagosc777]

Has video of what seemingly ubisoft employees watch

I added it to the OP. And some people here were calling it fake, haha. There's one guy in the video that even admits they want to use their "cultural influence" through their games.

 

[Lionel Richie]

No, sir.
What we should strive for is freedom and self-determination, for people to be able to do in life what they want to do in life. If women, as an aggregate, statistically speaking, are less inclined to want to work in the videogame industry, for whatever voluntary reason, so be it. No drama.

Unless you can show there's something systemic about the industry that is preventing women in droves from taking on videogames as a career, your claim is nothing but air.

74% of the people working in the industry are men. Not gonna claim I know why the gender split is so significant in the industry and I can only speculate. There are some good possible reasons here *WARNING* there's a Zoe pic and that might cause your asshole to explode, but even so that's besides the point since you also can only speculate on why it is like it is. Video games are a still relatively young medium, any kind of statistic that would point to women being less inclined to work in the field are not big enough in sample size to have any kind of merit besides being a faux-scientific diagnosis. What you miss the point on ridiculously is that this specific policy is an internal policy that you would never be aware of had it not been leaked. The company out of their own volition thought there might be an issue that they could help to alleviate. That's it. They're not antagonizing you, they're acknowledging that there might be some barriers that women face that go beyond the Jordan Peterson-lite argument you presented and they think they can make their employees more comfortable. I know, it truly sounds horrific.

Oh, the gobsmacking irony! You are suggesting that having more female writers would result in more female characters, because that's what women do, write about themselves, right? No, not a stereotype at all. And you'd want black writers writing black protags, trarns writers writing trans ones.

This is the Orwellian intersectional view of the world.

And then you would likely proceed to criticizing white male writers for not succumbing to the pious calls for more diversity and primarily going with male protagonists.

And why would having more female characters be a good thing in and of itself? And is that just your opinion or would it be objectively better to have more female characters?

I'm not sure how you got that out of what I said lol when in fact I argued that people sometimes miss the point of diversity in game being the thing they should be fighting for, since in my eyes it's the creative diversity that is way more important (although I do realize that having more female characters could estimulate more women to create games, but that turns into a cause and effect shitshow that I just don't feel like I'm able to discuss). Maybe this is one those the more you know kind of things that surprise you by not being true at all, but it sounds intuitive to suggest that men have an easier time writing about men and that women have an easier time writing about women, and that when you fight for a more diverse cast of characters but your creators are still homogeneous you end up with creative nightmares that sound completely phony like the black woman in Human Revolution or the trans chick in Andromeda.

Wanting a better creative product is not very Orwellian, sorry to disappointing.

If by maturing past you mean the persistent inability of your side to present a rational case, then, yes, I would agree.

I don't have a side dude. I approach these things on a case by case basis. Unless you mean my side on this specific issue that companies doing nice things (that by all accounts you shouldn't even be aware of) for its employees is a nice and possibly helpful thing and when it comes to that I feel like my side has presented a rational case.

The way to overcome your frustration would be to have a more robust case, because, frankly, as of now, you could hardly do worse.

"It's nice for companies" sums up the depth of your convictions perfectly.

Ugh. I know you think you're styling on fools, but you're way off mark here. Not trying to assume shit here, but I guess you don't work in the industry. This policy doesn't affect you then. You (probably) don't have any inside knowledge of why it was created and if it has any merit. Unless you can correct me on my assumption, you're just chasing ghosts.

 

[Golgo 13]

This shit makes me sick. No more Ubisoft, no more.

 

[lock2k]

I miss the time when we played games as a yellow pizza shaped creature who eats ghosts or a blue hedgehog that runs and loops around. No one cared about representation and gameplay was king. We live in some kind of boring alternate reality now.

 

[LordPezix]

RED DEAD HERE I COME BABY!!!!!!! WOOOOOOOO. LESSS GOOO!!!!!

We need more WOOO.

 

[oagboghi2]

Actually, black people talk about this all the time. Many black people have said that we hate being over-sexualized in many different ways. The well-endowed thing plays into that.

Well speaking as a black man, I'm going to take the counter position and say this is absolutely not true. I have never, in my life, met a black guy who is offended at the "black guys will steal your girl" stereotype, or the big dick joke.

 

[oagboghi2]

So what if a game does both? Why are people acting as if a game that's inclusive, can't be deep and interesting?

Have you seen the crap Ubisoft releases? Shallow is the nicest word one can use for them

 

[Atrus]

Considering I already avoid Ubisoft games this is doesn't change much. They're a design by numbers, fill the gaps with collectables, and monetize with dlc developer who excels at marketing. Engaging stories and deep gameplay? No. Timesinks? Yes.

It wouldn't be too surprising to know they have internal policies based on unsupported ideology by people whose credentials top out at media critic and social commentator.

 

[Shmunter]

You know, I hope nobody takes offence. I'm a bit of a movie buff, so of course I watched Wonder Woman & Black Panther. And honestly found them to be nothing special at all.

Yet the praise received would make you think they were movies of the decade. So I need to ask, is the praise genuine or is it skewed due to the strong Woman protagonist, and the Black protagonists? Is inclusion or a flattering representation worth extra merit in critique of media?

If so, are game companies as businesses chasing this for some free points. Or am I the one that is Blinkered and can't see the forest through the trees?

 

[Moneal]

You know, I hope nobody takes offence. I'm a bit of a movie buff, so of course I watched Wonder Woman & Black Panther. And honestly found them to be nothing special at all.

Yet the praise received would make you think they were movies of the decade. So I need to ask, is the praise genuine or is it skewed due to the strong Woman protagonist, and the Black protagonists? Is inclusion or a flattering representation worth extra merit in critique of media?

If so, are game companies as businesses chasing this for some free points. Or am I the one that is Blinkered and can't see the forest through the trees?

I feel the same way. I liked both and to me both were pretty good superhero movies, but both had bad 3rd acts. Wonder Woman pales in comparison to Ripley from Alien and Aliens. Though she is a much better character than Rey. Black Panther was not as good as either of the first 2 Blade movies. The problem isn't that people don't like black or female protags. Never has been.

The companies see the writing on the wall, that whites are slowly becoming a minority, and losing buying power, and they are shouting about their inclusiveness to garner good will in the future, when that buying power fades. It has noting to do with trying to be inclusive or social justice. They are just chasing what they always have and always will, money.

 

[CatCouch]

Since this stuff moves fast and never really ends I haven't read all the discussion here so anyone can correct me if I'm wrong or if anything I say has already been brought up and debated.

My experiences with these kinds of discussions leads me to believe that the divide is so wide because we're not on the same page anymore. I really think quite a few people have fallen into echo chambers without noticing and have adopted different definitions of words like diversity, racism and sexism. I've seen debates on the news and on Twitter/forums where it seems like each side is speaking a foreign language. I notice some take diversity to mean adding more minorities, women etc. to what we already have (which is what I believe) while others argue diversity is cutting down the amount of white males, sexy women and the like (a view point that repels me).

I see it all the time, one side views diversity as taking away what they like in games so they resist it while another side views diversity as adding what they want in games but don't often get. Put the two together and they clash over the same word since they don't even agree on what it means. I also see it with racism, some view it as discrimination based on skin color but others may view it as a power issue that occasionally leads to arguments that only white people can be racist since they have power and privilege. It seriously can feel like a foreign language where debates don't even have a common definition of the words at the center of the debate.

I'd love to see a broader debate that defined these terms so there could be common ground instead of the usual accusations of "SJW" and "toxic gamers" that get used to write off other view points.

From what I see Ubisoft is on the side I agree with. Adding female characters as playable options in AC Odyssey and Far Cry 5 pleases me. I don't see these games removing content as much as they are adding options. I really enjoyed FC5 and for the first time in more than 6 years I bought an Assassin's Creed game. Ubisoft has not repelled me like Bioware and EA has.

 

[Paracelsus]

Uh-huh.

You know, I hope nobody takes offence. I'm a bit of a movie buff, so of course I watched Wonder Woman & Black Panther. And honestly found them to be nothing special at all.

Yet the praise received would make you think they were movies of the decade. So I need to ask, is the praise genuine or is it skewed due to the strong Woman protagonist, and the Black protagonists? Is inclusion or a flattering representation worth extra merit in critique of media?

If so, are game companies as businesses chasing this for some free points. Or am I the one that is Blinkered and can't see the forest through the trees?

That is clearly the case. They tried to do the same with Star Wars, and failed.

 

[Zewp]

Talk about being obsessed with identity politics and never shutting up about it. But enough about anti-SJWs for now.

Wasn't planning on getting this until Friday, but now I'm getting the ultimate edition. Anything that makes anti-SJWs lose their shit is hilarious in my eyes. I'm sure the game will be no different to any of the ones that came before, no matter how much the basement dwellers whine and gnash their teeth. This "SJW apocalypse" that we've been hearing about for the last 5 years has been incredibly mild so far.

 

[Cosmogony]

74% of the people working in the industry are men.

Yes.

Not gonna claim I know why the gender split is so significant in the industry

And yet you seem eager to rectify the situation.
Gets one thinking.

and I can only speculate. There are some good possible reasons here *WARNING* there's a Zoe pic and that might cause your asshole to explode,

You talk about your asshole all you want and leave mine out of your replies, if you please.

but even so that's besides the point since you also can only speculate on why it is like it is

.

The default position is that in contemporary free market western societies, which is where these studios are located, the market is working. Companies are hiring, people are looking for jobs. Unless you can show otherwise, the default position is the 74% mark has been reached on an entirely voluntary basis, which is how it should be anyway. I can hardly wait for your evidence that it's not the case.

Video games are a still relatively young medium, any kind of statistic that would point to women being less inclined to work in the field are not big enough in sample size to have any kind of merit besides being a faux-scientific diagnosis.

Bald face assertion. Research on gender and STEM field did not begin last week.

What you miss the point on ridiculously is that this specific policy is an internal policy that you would never be aware of had it not been leaked.

What a silly remark. These policies have consequences in the content they put out, which is the crux of the matter.

The company out of their own volition thought there might be an issue that they could help to alleviate.

Which they are entitled to. They have every right to set internal policies to promote whichever values they choose. I, in turn, have every right to call them out.

That's it. They're not antagonizing you, they're acknowledging that there might be some barriers that women face that go beyond the Jordan Peterson-lite argument you presented and they think they can make their employees more comfortable. I know, it truly sounds horrific.

Who said they are antagonizing me, that their core motivation is pissing a certain demographic off? They have every right to conduct business the way they see fit and I have every right to decide which games to buy. I also have every right to express my opinions on their policies, which is what I'm doing here. Yet all of this seems to escape you. Why would that be?

I'm not sure how you got that out of what I said

You made the implication. It's the logic corolary. You spoke of not enough female characters as a symptom and said it'd be better to address the root cause, lack of female devs. If so, having more female devs would necessarily lead to more female characters, because, they - female devs - would necessarily write more female characters. Do I really have to spell it out?

(…)

Maybe this is one those the more you know kind of things that surprise you by not being true at all, but it sounds intuitive to suggest that men have an easier time writing about men and that women have an easier time writing about women, and that when you fight for a more diverse cast of characters but your creators are still homogeneous you end up with creative nightmares that sound completely phony like the black woman in Human Revolution or the trans chick in Andromeda.

I am not asserting that men and women can write interchangeably. But this is an example of the real life consequences of adopting the policies you propose: Diversity is a good thing per se, Diversity in cast is a good thing per se, to write a diverse cast you necessarily must have diverse writers. This is the rationale ready and willing to justify hiring people not for their competence but over arbitrary characteristics such as gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation. Too bad you cannot see that.

Wanting a better creative product is not very Orwellian, sorry to disappointing.

Intersectionality is an Orwelian world view.

I don't have a side dude.

Says the individual who wouldn't resist inserting the usual vacuous Jordan Peterson reference.

I approach these things on a case by case basis. Unless you mean my side on this specific issue that companies doing nice things (that by all accounts you shouldn't even be aware of) for its employees is a nice and possibly helpful thing and when it comes to that I feel like my side has presented a rational case.

Your standards on what constitutes a rational case are piss poor then. But that has been established already by a long history of posts .

Ugh. I know you think you're styling on fools, but you're way off mark here. Not trying to assume shit here, but I guess you don't work in the industry. This policy doesn't affect you then. You (probably) don't have any inside knowledge of why it was created and if it has any merit. Unless you can correct me on my assumption, you're just chasing ghosts.

I reiterate what I said.

 

[KonradLaw]

As long as their games are fun I don't care. Especially since videogames are becoming more and more worldwide, while SJW infestation is limited to few countries, so even if the big devs would turn crap (and I doubt they will, too much money on the line), there will always be new ones ready to take over.

 

[oagboghi2]

Talk about being obsessed with identity politics and never shutting up about it. But enough about anti-SJWs for now.

Wasn't planning on getting this until Friday, but now I'm getting the ultimate edition. Anything that makes anti-SJWs lose their shit is hilarious in my eyes. I'm sure the game will be no different to any of the ones that came before, no matter how much the basement dwellers whine and gnash their teeth. This "SJW apocalypse" that we've been hearing about for the last 5 years has been incredibly mild so far.

You spent 100 dollars to spite people who don't know you exist. I think you are the one obsessed mate, becuase they seem to have an influence over your wallet

 

[Zewp]

You spent 100 dollars to spite people who don't know you exist. I think you are the one obsessed mate, becuase they seem to have an influence over your wallet

orly

I was going to buy the game and DLC anyway, just like I did with Origins. Now I'm just telling Ubisoft that they're doing a great job and should keep it up by increasing their preorder numbers.

You should probably also have a look at how many anti-SJW threads there were on this game in the last few weeks. It seems all Gaf can talk about is SJWs and the alleged SJW apocalypse. Meanwhile, I haven't run across an actual SJW in months, on forums or in social media. Just anti-SJWs whining and gnashing their teeth. But hey, anti-SJWs aren't obsessed.
I wonder whatever happened to that GamerGate thing where they said "can't we just play games?"

 

[Cosmogony]

Talk about being obsessed with identity politics and never shutting up about it. But enough about anti-SJWs for now.

So a company is revealed to have adopted identity politics as a guideline for hiring and producing content, and yet you somehow manage to depict this as the other side being obsessed by intersectionality?

I can right away see that your views are balanced.

Wasn't planning on getting this until Friday, but now I'm getting the ultimate edition. Anything that makes anti-SJWs lose their shit is hilarious in my eyes.

So the other side is the one obsessed and yet you are the one having your purchase decisions dictated by whatever pisses the other side off?

Yes, it does seem like the most rational conduct.

I can't and so don't speak for anyone lese. But I couldn't care less how you spend your money. It's white noise to me.

I'm sure the game will be no different to any of the ones that came before, no matter how much the basement dwellers whine and gnash their teeth. This "SJW apocalypse" that we've been hearing about for the last 5 years has been incredibly mild so far.

So you describe the situation in hyperbolic terms and then proceed to claim the situation isn't nearly as bad?

You have exceptional debating skills.

 

[Frank Spencer]

How can someone with only 20k followers on Twitter be so influential?

*Oh and probably not even 20k as many are either bought or bots like most accounts trying to push an agenda.

 

[Zewp]

So a company is revealed to have adopted identity politics as a guideline for hiring and producing content, and yet you somehow manage to depict this as the other side being obsessed by intersectionality?

Considering we've been hearing about "SJWs ruining mah vidya" for 5 years, which hasn't happened yet and the quality of AAA games have generally just been increasing, yeah. It is a weird obsession that anti-SJWs have with SJWs. Like the recent Spider-Man, which many are hailing as GotY, but somehow didn't manage to escape the angered gaze of the anti-SJWs (waah, why do the wimmins look normal and blah blah blah).

So the other side is the one obsessed and yet you are the one having your purchase decisions dictated by whatever pisses the other side off?

Yes, it does seem like the most rational conduct.

I can't and so don't speak for anyone lese. But I couldn't care less how you spend your money. It's white noise to me.

I think you should reconsider what the word 'dictate' means, because it doesn't mean what you think it means. Though it is super interesting that you took affront with me (and later hilariously claimed you don't care), but not every time a conservative/controversial developer brings out a game and conservatives fall over themselves with things like "buy this game to piss of Ess-Jay-Dubbayous!"

So you describe the situation in hyperbolic terms and then proceed to claim the situation isn't nearly as bad?

You have exceptional debating skills.

Sorry, I didn't realise English wasn't your native language. Let me try to explain it in a way that is easy for you to understand. The 'hyperbole' isn't my claim, it's what anti-SJWs have been claiming since Gamergate dropped. "SJWs are going to destroy gaming" and blah blah blah. Go to IGN or Gamefaqs or clearly, even Neogaf, and all you'll read all day is threads about how SJWs are allegedly dangerous to gaming and ruining the hobby and god knows what else. Go to any mainstream gaming forum and it's borderline impossible to discuss games without the conversation inevitably turning to "forced diversity" or whatever else boogeyman they can cook up. Meanwhile, there isn't any basis for any of this in the majority of games being discussed anyway.

You can't even go to Resetera either, because they're just the opposite side of the same coin. For anyone skirting the middle-line who is genuinely interested in talking about videogames without the unnecessary political hysterics, there really is just nowhere to get that at this point. At that point, what other option is there but to piss on the batteries of the 'dominant' faction on a particular forum.

AC Odyssey is great so far, though. I hope the character turns out to be trans halfway through.