PC Gamer criticizes RimWorld for being too "heteronormative".

Jun 13, 2018
1,137
1,590
295
#1
https://archive.fo/WcrT6


RimWorld Developer's response
I usually wouldn't comment on reviews but this part of @PCGamer's review needs addressing. All trans character descriptions were written by players through our "Backstory in Game" program. I don't think it's my place to censor how people describe their own experiences.

This part of the review implies that I, as the developer, was supposed to be writing trans backstories in a more correct way. But what words can possibly be more correct than the actual words of a trans person?
We were inclusive to the varied self-perspectives of our diverse players - and it's used as a point against the game. The review gives no indication of where the quoted words came from, misleading readers into thinking that it was all written by some misguided game writer.
I am asking PCGamer to issue a correction to clarify that these words they're calling "reductive" and "bad taste" were written by players describing their own trans self-perspectives, not by a game writer.
PCGamer have since added a NOTE "clarifying" the fact that " some of RimWorld's backstories were created by Kickstarter backers. ". They have also closed the comment section.



They also never found out that you don't need to manually harvest potatoes.
PCGamer said:
Going through an entire field of potato plants to order each of them to be harvested is the kind of busy work that feels needless
 
Sep 25, 2015
4,261
1,040
320
Somewhere in space
#7
When they said 'PC Gamer', I didn't think they meant it like that... :pie_thinking:

Strikes me as the usual idpol agenda press shitting on creators for the sake of pushing their faux-virtuous nonsense. Doubtless they didn't expect the dev to come back with 'these are real trans stories', and the disingenuous addendum and locking of the comment section only serves to further demonstrate their intent to speak but not listen.

And that's to say nothing of the low-effort "oh it's the far flung future how regressive that straight is still normal" argument. RimWorld isn't Star Trek. It's a grimy galactic wild west future where FTL travel and communication is not a thing, and thus neither are shiny large-scale space empires and their associated culture.

Demanding representation only to move the goalposts and throw a tantrum when said representation isn't "our game is exclusively about trans folk" or "our game paints a future where trans is the norm". You literally cannot please these people.
 
Last edited:
Apr 5, 2018
392
492
225
#9
When they said 'PC Gamer', I didn't think they meant it like that... :pie_thinking:

Strikes me as the usual idpol agenda press shitting on creators for the sake of pushing their faux-virtuous nonsense. Doubtless they didn't expect the dev to come back with 'these are real trans stories', and the disingenuous addendum and locking of the comment section only serves to further demonstrate their intent to speak but not listen.

And that's to say nothing of the low-effort "oh it's the far flung future how regressive that straight is still normal" argument. RimWorld isn't Star Trek. It's a grimy galactic wild west future where FTL travel and communication is not a thing, and thus neither are shiny large-scale space empires and their associated culture.

Demanding representation only to move the goalposts and throw a tantrum when said representation isn't "our game is exclusively about trans folk" or "our game paints a future where trans is the norm". You literally cannot please these people.
Bravo sir , i couldn't have said it better myself
 
Mar 6, 2018
1,537
1,918
290
#10
THIS is how it's done, people! Article or review is written where the author and site owners are only too happy to have angry people who disagree linking to and promoting their article. That gets shutdown when thread creators use archival sites, and the only thing promoted then is the fact that you should never visit their garbage website.

Don't reward these clowns for sowing divisiveness.
 
Sep 25, 2015
4,261
1,040
320
Somewhere in space
#12
Kind of funny that the literal translation is "to designate 'the other' as good or desirable" when it's not being used as a buzzword colloquialism for "straight people bad".

Almost as if these people that self-indentify as 'the other' while using big words to make their articles sound clever and authoritative are raging idiots.
 
Last edited:
Nov 24, 2018
1,463
915
210
#20
I mean, if they bother adding such traits then they might as well do it more indepth like the rest of the game's mechanics, I don't see the problem here to be up in arms about it. Also there's no way to know if they actually docked it points for that or just wanted to mention it since it is in fact part of the game.The bit where they missed game functions is actually egregious and they should amend their review for it.
 
Last edited:
Aug 22, 2018
1,335
1,583
245
#21
Writer has form for this sort of thing. First up, (s)he hates straight men [at this point I'm not sure if she's lesbian or trans]:

Previous body of work includes:
https://web.archive.org/web/2018081...-but-gaming-is-still-far-from-queer-inclusive
https://web.archive.org/web/2018112...eally-need-to-fall-out-of-love-with-lovecraft (you probably remember this)
https://web.archive.org/web/2018111...1-09-we-need-to-talk-about-kassandra-s-biceps
https://web.archive.org/web/2018091...from-games-to-create-stress-free-experiences/

The worrying thing is that, while writing for the Guardian is no surprise, she also appears on the BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06sb312 - very one-note), further supporting my notion that the BBC is largely overrun with SJWs (this was something I first considered when I noticed the disparity in coverage between International Men's Day and International Women's Day).

Weirdly, she seems to be half-sane in 2017, for the most part writing about games (https://web.archive.org/web/2018111...9/the-witcher-is-gamings-greatest-protagonist isn't bad for instance). It seems that in 2018 something went wrong. I'd be curious to know exactly what.
 
Nov 26, 2006
8,733
119
1,030
#22
Yeah, PC Gamer reviews are pretty crappy. There's this gem in the Katamari Review

But I mostly felt the game’s age whenever gender popped up, though. There’s a Virgo level where you collect maidens and encyclopedia descriptions of men and women hinge around stereotypes—a woman dieting for a bikini body, and men banished from the house for golf practice.
 
Nov 24, 2018
1,463
915
210
#24
Writer has form for this sort of thing. First up, (s)he hates straight men [at this point I'm not sure if she's lesbian or trans]:

Previous body of work includes:
https://web.archive.org/web/2018081...-but-gaming-is-still-far-from-queer-inclusive
https://web.archive.org/web/2018112...eally-need-to-fall-out-of-love-with-lovecraft (you probably remember this)
https://web.archive.org/web/2018111...1-09-we-need-to-talk-about-kassandra-s-biceps
https://web.archive.org/web/2018091...from-games-to-create-stress-free-experiences/

The worrying thing is that, while writing for the Guardian is no surprise, she also appears on the BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06sb312 - very one-note), further supporting my notion that the BBC is largely overrun with SJWs (this was something I first considered when I noticed the disparity in coverage between International Men's Day and International Women's Day).

Weirdly, she seems to be half-sane in 2017, for the most part writing about games (https://web.archive.org/web/2018111...9/the-witcher-is-gamings-greatest-protagonist isn't bad for instance). It seems that in 2018 something went wrong. I'd be curious to know exactly what.
I mean, women's day is built on blood for the fight for equal rights during some pretty harsh times, men's day was deviced some 100 years later and was built on winning the football cup and somebody's birthday and then trying to add men's/boys health connotations, gender equality, and all that stuff on top, I can understand the disparity in coverage wherever it might surface like I don't expect everybody to report on international chocolate day in the same manner. Men's day is also celebrated in some 20 less countries than women's and that's not to say the other countries are sexist against men, I doubt they're amazon nations, rather maybe they don't see the need for it or the group that started this didn't resonate with them enough or whatever other reason. In comparison I feel father's day is equally promoted to mother's day for example. Not seeing any hate for straight men in your links either. Thought your links were to back that up but I don't see it even if I did raise an eyebrow when I came across the lovecraft one.
 
Last edited:
Aug 22, 2018
1,335
1,583
245
#25
@Al3x1s sadly you're parrotting the mainstream view of what men's day is. Men's day is actually trying to cover issues such as suicide rates being higher among men, male cancers which generally get overlooked in campaigning, etc. The problem is that if men try to raise these issues they're written off as MRAs or incels or whatever, and men are made to feel guilty about fighting for their rights while women are treated as heroes for doing the same, hence piss-poor coverage of international men's day vs women's day.
 
Aug 3, 2010
20,465
2,380
675
In a cave outside of Whooville.
#27
One of the modifiers is "gay" but "straight isn't - that's just the default, which is painfully heteronormative and outdated for a game about the far flung future.
Why do all the SJW weirdos have this weird assumption that in the future there are so many more gay people than there are now? I see this mentality a lot about shows/movies/games that take place in the far future.

Why would people be more likely to be gay/bi/trans/whatever just because time has passed? If it was a better fit for a human's environment then I could see things evolving that way, but from everything we're told on a daily basis, life is so much harder if you're one of those things. So why is it always their assumption that we would be evolving to be less fit for our environment in the far future?
 
Last edited:
Oct 13, 2014
1,433
90
310
Germany
#29
Mar 19, 2015
393
277
375
#30
Writer has form for this sort of thing. First up, (s)he hates straight men [at this point I'm not sure if she's lesbian or trans]:

Previous body of work includes:
https://web.archive.org/web/2018081...-but-gaming-is-still-far-from-queer-inclusive
https://web.archive.org/web/2018112...eally-need-to-fall-out-of-love-with-lovecraft (you probably remember this)
https://web.archive.org/web/2018111...1-09-we-need-to-talk-about-kassandra-s-biceps
https://web.archive.org/web/2018091...from-games-to-create-stress-free-experiences/

The worrying thing is that, while writing for the Guardian is no surprise, she also appears on the BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06sb312 - very one-note), further supporting my notion that the BBC is largely overrun with SJWs (this was something I first considered when I noticed the disparity in coverage between International Men's Day and International Women's Day).

Weirdly, she seems to be half-sane in 2017, for the most part writing about games (https://web.archive.org/web/2018111...9/the-witcher-is-gamings-greatest-protagonist isn't bad for instance). It seems that in 2018 something went wrong. I'd be curious to know exactly what.
Jesus christ, talk about a bias. Men are the worst! They always try to approach me and flirt with me! ARGH GHASTLY MEN WONT YOU JUST GO AWAY!??!

Jesus christ
 
Nov 5, 2016
3,462
2,225
270
I don't care where (just far)
#31
https://archive.fo/WcrT6


RimWorld Developer's response

PCGamer have since added a NOTE "clarifying" the fact that " some of RimWorld's backstories were created by Kickstarter backers. ". They have also closed the comment section.



They also never found out that you don't need to manually harvest potatoes.
The developers response seems to perfectly squash the criticism, and render it invalid. Props to them for addressing it head on.
 
Nov 24, 2018
1,463
915
210
#32
Why do all the SJW weirdos have this weird assumption that in the future there are so many more gay people than there are now? I see this mentality a lot about shows/movies/games that take place in the far future.

Why would people be more likely to be gay/bi/trans/whatever just because time has passed? If it was a better fit for a human's environment then I could see things evolving that way, but from everything we're told on a daily basis, life is so much harder if you're one of those things. So why is it always their assumption that we would be evolving to be less fit for our environment in the far future?
I think the idea is that in the idealized Star Trek TNG style future with humankind united and what not there's even less discrimination (worldwide even in countries where it's currently a crime for example) and therefor they're more widely acknowledged and accepted and included in all such options, not that there are more of them (though in that case there'd less closeted and maybe appear to have a somewhat higher percentage too, maybe more trans if they're more accepted and can get access to the operation easier in more countries around the world, etc., not sure how that all works out).
 
Last edited:
Aug 22, 2018
1,335
1,583
245
#33
A little bit of research would have probably been to much of an effort.

To be fair, this turned out differently than I expected. I expected something like "lame-ass approach by Ubisoft to make Kassandra different!" or anything like this sort. I mean, I'm male and I also love Kassandras appearence (and her biceps).
I don't have a dog in that particular fight, I just found it amusing that discussing a characters biceps is now journalism. It's right up there with PC Gamer's 10 best butts in gaming imo. FWIW I like lots of different kinds of women, and yes women with a bit of muscle are definitely on the menu (or would be if I wasn't married).
 
Last edited:
Nov 5, 2016
3,462
2,225
270
I don't care where (just far)
#38
Yup. We’re not even talking about games anymore. People are just looking to be upset and outraged. I’m so sick of it
I always preach that in life it’s really important to pick your battles. Not every hill is the one to die on. People lose credibility that way. There ARE reasons to be upset sometimes, there ARE issues to criticize sometimes, but this isn’t one of them.

Sending up emergency flares at every opportunity just hurts everyone in the end. It’s like “The Boy Who Cried Wolf,” basically
 
Jun 13, 2017
522
505
205
#39
What does heteronormative even mean, of course being straight is the norm, the whole species depends on it, there's nothing wrong with being different but complaining that something is the norm just because it's fucking moronic. Most people aren't midgets, being a midget isn't the norm.
 
Jun 24, 2014
2,928
137
420
#40
The world is heteronormative, why do these snowflakes need over representation to feel better about themselves? Its like these people think 1 out of 4 people is gay, or trans, or whatever. Just look at shows like Riverdale and their complete over saturation of lgbtq.

Same goes for race. If your race makes up 13% of the population then you should make up 13% of the movie castings, win 13% of the awards and be represented at around 13% on tv.

Tokenism has gotten out of control
 
Jul 26, 2018
246
211
195
#42
I've noticed that the written language often unveils some clues to if people are projecting their own biases and interpretations by the use of "I feel" rather than "I think".

When you write "I think" before putting out an idea, you generally want to explain why you think something. When you write "I feel" you get a catch-out-of-jail card where your own feelings inform your outlook on the world. So if you feel prosecuted or feel others are prosecuted constantly, you might be irrationally "feeling" that everything is potentially out to get you, or out to get those you claim to speak for.

I know from myself that I have falled into this trap of using "I feel" to justify my own bias. Probably because it's intellectually easy, and because sometimes I feel lazy. I've observed many times that when it comes to "social agenda" from the left, it is often relayed through the use of "I feel". Others are supposed to take and accept the argument with the use of "I feel" to explain the persons outrage or argument. But really, there is no justification. The world is not how you view it. Because how you view the world is totally distorted by your feelings. And that is true for all of us.

This is also one of those things were being an expert or highly knowledgeable of a subject can betray you. You feel a natural authority in that you are right because of your experiences or knowledge. You see that, particularly in Academia. Experts on subjects are the most unwilling to be open to the idea that there is more to it than they know. Ones own experience creates a bias that distorts them from how things actually are. Experience, expertise and being knowledgeable something counts for something. But stepping aside and not vetting yourself as an expert is a red flag to ones own credibility. Even if you know 100000% that someone else is wrong, instead of emotionally charging your argumentation based through a veil of "I feel" or name dropping your groups, suffrage or experiences to dismiss someone else instead of focusing on understanding your opponents logic.
If you really want to "win" over someone in an ideological contest, understand their position and motivation better than they do. Be better at them in why they believe in their own talking points- And from there, find flaws in their logic that rips it apart from within.

A lot of the time when talking about subjects that are close to emotions, we will have biased and radical viewpoints. And this is a spectrum we all belong on. There is nobody here whose ideological opinions won't be easily influenced by a number of factors. The smell of trash for example.

I've not played Rimworld, but that you'd take attempts of inclusion directly to comparing being queer or transgender to being a psychopath because the games outline RPG traits in a certain manner, seems like a stretch. I do believe most things are heteronormative, since the vast majority of people are heterosexual, and as far as I know- Most LGBT people are not in disagreements about that? RPG games are about choice and playing how you want. Since the game allows outlines these possibilities in a world of games that don't represent these groups, I am not sure if these PCGamer statements are actually anything but harmful towards LGBT. Doesn't sound the writer gave a shit about anyone other than wanting to beat the reader with such a narrow and singular interpretation? At least that is how those specific paragraphs read to me. Doesn't sound like the writer has empathy for the readers or even the players.
 
Nov 5, 2016
3,462
2,225
270
I don't care where (just far)
#43
The world is heteronormative, why do these snowflakes need over representation to feel better about themselves? Its like these people think 1 out of 4 people is gay, or trans, or whatever. Just look at shows like Riverdale and their complete over saturation of lgbtq.

Same goes for race. If your race makes up 13% of the population then you should make up 13% of the movie castings, win 13% of the awards and be represented at around 13% on tv.

Tokenism has gotten out of control
Can’t say I necessarily agree with the majority of what you wrote here. The percentage concept especially seems like a slippery slope.

Either way I don’t think it’s worth outage in either direction. IMO, Tilda Swinton as Ancient One shouldn’t have been an issue, and on the flip side Zendaya as MJ shouldn’t be an issue.
 
Aug 22, 2018
1,335
1,583
245
#44
The world is heteronormative, why do these snowflakes need over representation to feel better about themselves? Its like these people think 1 out of 4 people is gay, or trans, or whatever. Just look at shows like Riverdale and their complete over saturation of lgbtq.

Same goes for race. If your race makes up 13% of the population then you should make up 13% of the movie castings, win 13% of the awards and be represented at around 13% on tv.

Tokenism has gotten out of control
If we get the percentages as you suggest we'll have tokenism.
 
Likes: RedVIper
Mar 19, 2015
393
277
375
#45
I've noticed that the written language often unveils some clues to if people are projecting their own biases and interpretations by the use of "I feel" rather than "I think".

When you write "I think" before putting out an idea, you generally want to explain why you think something. When you write "I feel" you get a catch-out-of-jail card where your own feelings inform your outlook on the world. So if you feel prosecuted or feel others are prosecuted constantly, you might be irrationally "feeling" that everything is potentially out to get you, or out to get those you claim to speak for.

I know from myself that I have falled into this trap of using "I feel" to justify my own bias. Probably because it's intellectually easy, and because sometimes I feel lazy. I've observed many times that when it comes to "social agenda" from the left, it is often relayed through the use of "I feel". Others are supposed to take and accept the argument with the use of "I feel" to explain the persons outrage or argument. But really, there is no justification. The world is not how you view it. Because how you view the world is totally distorted by your feelings. And that is true for all of us.

This is also one of those things were being an expert or highly knowledgeable of a subject can betray you. You feel a natural authority in that you are right because of your experiences or knowledge. You see that, particularly in Academia. Experts on subjects are the most unwilling to be open to the idea that there is more to it than they know. Ones own experience creates a bias that distorts them from how things actually are. Experience, expertise and being knowledgeable something counts for something. But stepping aside and not vetting yourself as an expert is a red flag to ones own credibility. Even if you know 100000% that someone else is wrong, instead of emotionally charging your argumentation based through a veil of "I feel" or name dropping your groups, suffrage or experiences to dismiss someone else instead of focusing on understanding your opponents logic.
If you really want to "win" over someone in an ideological contest, understand their position and motivation better than they do. Be better at them in why they believe in their own talking points- And from there, find flaws in their logic that rips it apart from within.

A lot of the time when talking about subjects that are close to emotions, we will have biased and radical viewpoints. And this is a spectrum we all belong on. There is nobody here whose ideological opinions won't be easily influenced by a number of factors. The smell of trash for example.

I've not played Rimworld, but that you'd take attempts of inclusion directly to comparing being queer or transgender to being a psychopath because the games outline RPG traits in a certain manner, seems like a stretch. I do believe most things are heteronormative, since the vast majority of people are heterosexual, and as far as I know- Most LGBT people are not in disagreements about that? RPG games are about choice and playing how you want. Since the game allows outlines these possibilities in a world of games that don't represent these groups, I am not sure if these PCGamer statements are actually anything but harmful towards LGBT. Doesn't sound the writer gave a shit about anyone other than wanting to beat the reader with such a narrow and singular interpretation? At least that is how those specific paragraphs read to me. Doesn't sound like the writer has empathy for the readers or even the players.
Great post!
 
May 24, 2005
39,013
1,965
1,320
#46
The timing of this review, days after Rimworld being ranked as best reviewed 2018 game on Steam and the Overwatch "Soldier76 is gay" story, is impossible to ignore.
That, plus the review page with 0 comments and with comments locked, reinforces the mentality behind all this.
What does Overwatch and Soldier76 have to do with this RimWorld story?
 
Likes: JareBear
Sep 6, 2010
882
78
555
Canada
#48
I've noticed that the written language often unveils some clues to if people are projecting their own biases and interpretations by the use of "I feel" rather than "I think".

When you write "I think" before putting out an idea, you generally want to explain why you think something. When you write "I feel" you get a catch-out-of-jail card where your own feelings inform your outlook on the world. So if you feel prosecuted or feel others are prosecuted constantly, you might be irrationally "feeling" that everything is potentially out to get you, or out to get those you claim to speak for.

I know from myself that I have falled into this trap of using "I feel" to justify my own bias. Probably because it's intellectually easy, and because sometimes I feel lazy. I've observed many times that when it comes to "social agenda" from the left, it is often relayed through the use of "I feel". Others are supposed to take and accept the argument with the use of "I feel" to explain the persons outrage or argument. But really, there is no justification. The world is not how you view it. Because how you view the world is totally distorted by your feelings. And that is true for all of us.

This is also one of those things were being an expert or highly knowledgeable of a subject can betray you. You feel a natural authority in that you are right because of your experiences or knowledge. You see that, particularly in Academia. Experts on subjects are the most unwilling to be open to the idea that there is more to it than they know. Ones own experience creates a bias that distorts them from how things actually are. Experience, expertise and being knowledgeable something counts for something. But stepping aside and not vetting yourself as an expert is a red flag to ones own credibility. Even if you know 100000% that someone else is wrong, instead of emotionally charging your argumentation based through a veil of "I feel" or name dropping your groups, suffrage or experiences to dismiss someone else instead of focusing on understanding your opponents logic.
If you really want to "win" over someone in an ideological contest, understand their position and motivation better than they do. Be better at them in why they believe in their own talking points- And from there, find flaws in their logic that rips it apart from within.

A lot of the time when talking about subjects that are close to emotions, we will have biased and radical viewpoints. And this is a spectrum we all belong on. There is nobody here whose ideological opinions won't be easily influenced by a number of factors. The smell of trash for example.

I've not played Rimworld, but that you'd take attempts of inclusion directly to comparing being queer or transgender to being a psychopath because the games outline RPG traits in a certain manner, seems like a stretch. I do believe most things are heteronormative, since the vast majority of people are heterosexual, and as far as I know- Most LGBT people are not in disagreements about that? RPG games are about choice and playing how you want. Since the game allows outlines these possibilities in a world of games that don't represent these groups, I am not sure if these PCGamer statements are actually anything but harmful towards LGBT. Doesn't sound the writer gave a shit about anyone other than wanting to beat the reader with such a narrow and singular interpretation? At least that is how those specific paragraphs read to me. Doesn't sound like the writer has empathy for the readers or even the players.
It's also basic journalism that there shouldn't be any "I" in an article.
 
May 24, 2005
39,013
1,965
1,320
#49
@Al3x1s sadly you're parrotting the mainstream view of what men's day is. Men's day is actually trying to cover issues such as suicide rates being higher among men, male cancers which generally get overlooked in campaigning, etc. The problem is that if men try to raise these issues they're written off as MRAs or incels or whatever, and men are made to feel guilty about fighting for their rights while women are treated as heroes for doing the same, hence piss-poor coverage of international men's day vs women's day.
To be honest, calling it International Men's day is just stupid! Someone on some PR team needs to explain why it seems. Covering those issues that adhere to men more than women is a perfectly legit thing to do and it's 100% necessary. You just gotta come up with a better name.

Like Country Music Television (CMT), didn't name their music channel WET (White Entertainment Television) just because there's a BET (Black Entertainment Television) channel on cable that exists.
 
Oct 24, 2017
5,706
4,409
335
#50
To be honest, calling it International Men's day is just stupid! Someone on some PR team needs to explain why it seems. Covering those issues that adhere to men more than women is a perfectly legit thing to do and it's 100% necessary. You just gotta come up with a better name.

Like Country Music Television (CMT), didn't name their music channel WET (White Entertainment Television) just because there's a BET (Black Entertainment Television) channel on cable that exists.
WHAT?

There is an international women's day there is an international children's day so why is a international men's day wrong?

Also I think people do no even know how old these days are.

Women's day was established around 1910 while the Men's Day is around since 1992

The first Children's day is even older since it first was established in 1857
 
Last edited: