Support NeoGAF

[RocknRola]

it's used mostly for protection against wind, heat, pollution etc.

Roger that. Interesting. Searching around it also seems these garments are quite "old", predating many of the stereotypes we have today.

Not at all. Women covering their faces with a duputta is a common occurrence in rough areas.

Ah, cool. Good to know! So I can assume ND actually did some research into this, which is also a good thing.

 

[EventHorizon]

To the people who are trying to justify this using practicality and realism, your missing the point. Plenty of harmful stereotypes exist in real life. Plenty of big lipped black people like fried chicken, watermelon, and grape juice (because those foods are fucking awesome). But if an artist carelessly decided to put that into a scene in their game, that would raise some alarm. Domestic abuse and sexual harassment is real, flamboyant gay people with lisps are real.


It's not about what's real. It's about how it's presented and what it implies.

This isn't an agreement with the OP. I want to see more discussions before I make that call. But people trying to argue by using real life as a justification are missing the point entirely.

Then I ask again....Seriously what would you expect a woman trying to infiltrate an enemy base in India to wear? A pantsuit? Perhaps a sundress? T-shirt and shorts?

 

[Fat4all]

Going by this thread (and myself), it is pretty mistakable depending on the audience, but hopefully ND takes a few steps to address and set aside what it's purpose is in-game, even if it's done subtly.

I doubt it's something that hasn't been talked about in their offices, they seem pretty keen on situations like this.

 

[Kinyou]

octocamo

That reminds me how mgs 4 opened...

This isn't problematic now as well, is it?

 

[SomTervo]

To the people who are trying to justify this using practicality and realism, your missing the point. Plenty of harmful stereotypes exist in real life. Plenty of big lipped black people like fried chicken, watermelon, and grape juice (because those foods are fucking awesome). But if an artist carelessly decided to put that into a scene in their game, that would raise some alarm. Domestic abuse and sexual harassment is real, flamboyant gay people with lisps are real.


It's not about what's real. It's about how it's presented and what it implies.

This isn't an agreement with the OP. I want to see more discussions before I make that call. But people trying to argue by using real life as a justification are missing the point entirely.

If this is pointed at me (please make it clear) the point isn't that everything should be real life. The point is that if you make a politically charged, very realistic representation (like they have) you should treat the details and implications as such. Give them depth. Don't make it a throwaway "she's wearing a scarf, ooh!" visual statement.

This is Naughty Dog so it's highly unlikely that's the case.

(And the situation here is that she's in highly hostile territory and needs to infiltrate - any "spy" would do this.)

 

[PaulloDEC]

the use of hijab/niqab, the headscarf and face veil, for the purpose for this trailer was to disguise, distract and deceive as she attempted to infiltrate a building that was under the guard of the state. it was precisely used in the way the general populace of europe and its governments suspect muslims of potentially using it for. NDs use of it in its reveal was precisely confirming that its quite reasonable to be suspicious.

Everything else aside, anyone who uses Uncharted, a fictional series that routinely deals with supernatural monsters and lost civilisations, to confirm their suspicions about any race are idiots who are beyond reason.

 

[X-Factor]

2016. Where people are overly sensitive and get offended over everything.


.

 

[Glass Rebel]

and here is why its impossible, because youre dealing with stereotypes, do you amend your accurate portrayal in order to be more conscious of the more sensitive issues affecting members of society?

I don't think Naughty Dog (or any creator) has to change anything but it's definitely important to have a discussion about it. Sadly, every thread like yours has posters that try to downplay or ridicule opinions they perceive as attacks on their fictional worlds and characters.

2016. Where people are overly sensitive and get offended over everything.


.

case in point

 

[Fat4all]

2016. Where people are overly sensitive and get offended over everything.


.

oh no, people are discussing things on a forum

how dare they

 

[SubbieD]

Roger that. Interesting. Searching around it also seems these garments are quite "old", predating many of the stereotypes we have today.

True. That whole setting looks like 1971 small town India, does not look contemporary at all. I'd think its a city from Uttar Pradesh (our biggest state), the accents are hilarious Western And there was an annoying bit when they were bitching about the country But oh well, orientalism right?

 

[SomTervo]

2016. Where people are overly sensitive and get offended over everything.


.

Thanks for the contribution, really appreciated.

Go ahead and read past the thread title/OP now. You can do it.

 

[Ishan]

To the people who are trying to justify this using practicality and realism, your missing the point. Plenty of harmful stereotypes exist in real life. Plenty of big lipped black people like fried chicken, watermelon, and grape juice (because those foods are fucking awesome). But if an artist carelessly decided to put that into a scene in their game, that would raise some alarm. Domestic abuse and sexual harassment is real, flamboyant gay people with lisps are real.


It's not about what's real. It's about how what is presented and what it implies.

This isn't an agreement with the OP. I want to see more discussions before I make that call. But people trying to argue by using real life as a justification are going about it the wrong way.

On that thought, it's actually interesting how often real life comes up as a justification in many talks about these topics. Often one of the first things go you hear about women being portrayed as weak is people pointing out their bodies are physically inferior, or some such examples. It's a trend, I think.

both perfect points.

this sort of puts ND in an impossible position of being utterly faithful to the region versus knowing their broad audience and imagery used.

a significant number of people on twitch thought that was an arab country spamming ANELE. not to take that at face value, i dont think its unreasonable to assume that most people see it as a muslim garment, however unintended it is, rather than a faithful representation of a part of india.

and here is why its impossible, because youre dealing with stereotypes, do you amend your accurate portrayal in order to be more conscious of the more sensitive issues affecting members of society?

I would much rather my country and it's people be portrayed in a faithful manner .

Hiding ones face with a dupatta is done for a variety of reasons including protecting oneself from unwanted attention not to be deceptive but also to avoid unwanted attention from some men . Etc etc ... It's wrong to just look at this from one viewpoint of Muslims and their perception in certain western contexts ...

I'm indian and I would urge nd to keep this as it is . Am we supposed to hide forms of Indian culture or faithful reproductions of it and of ppl living there and also behaviour of foreigners travelling thru such areas? If some idiot forms a bigot viewpoint that's his/her issue not mine or a problem with portraying something accurately

 

[Veelk]

Then I ask again....Seriously what would you expect a woman trying to infiltrate an enemy base in India to wear? A pantsuit? Perhaps a sundress? T-shirt and shorts?

You're under stating the power the storytellers have. She could be posing as some other authority, maybe go in with a different pretense of why she's there. Or, alternatively, just create a different kind of set piece. Instead of sneaking in by blending in, she takes an unoccupied route.

If the only way you can tell a scene is by conforming to racist bias, it's perhaps more prudent to rework the scene. ND wasn't stuck having to have Chloe do what she did.

If this is pointed at me (please make it clear) the point isn't that everything should be real life. The point is that if you make a politically charged, very realistic representation (like they have) you should treat the details and implications as such. Give them depth. Don't make it a throwaway "she's wearing a scarf, ooh!" visual statement.

This is Naughty Dog so it's highly unlikely that's the case.

As a marketing video, isn't that what they already did? Perhaps the main game will treat this with more depth, but this is how they chose to first show the game and its all we'll see of it for months on end.

That is what I assume the op's problem is.

 

[TheSpoiler]

both perfect points.

this sort of puts ND in an impossible position of being utterly faithful to the region versus knowing their broad audience and imagery used.

a significant number of people on twitch thought that was an arab country spamming ANELE. not to take that at face value, i dont think its unreasonable to assume that most people see it as a muslim garment, however unintended it is, rather than a faithful representation of a part of india.

and here is why its impossible, because youre dealing with stereotypes, do you amend your accurate portrayal in order to be more conscious of the more sensitive issues affecting members of society?

This is really more of a societal problem than ND's problem, because the latter hasn't really done anything wrong, and shouldn't have to go out of their way to explain something that can be done with a simple google search. That cultural accuracy shouldn't be nulled just because there's a possibility that people will mistake it for a negative stereotype. If anything, normalizing cultural bits and pieces lets us have discussions like this and inform people (like myself!).

I mean, the only other options here are having some sort of informational text to get people up to speed, or taking it out. I doubt many are going to do the former if they weren't already doing so, and the latter just isn't fair to those cultures seeking that normalization.

You're under stating the power the storytellers have. She could be posing as some other authority, maybe go in with a different pretense of why she's there. Or, alternatively, just create a different kind of set piece. Instead of sneaking in by blending in, she takes an unoccupied route.

If the only way you can tell a scene is by conforming to racist bias, it's perhaps more prudent to rework the scene. ND wasn't stuck having to have Chloe do what she did.

Racial bias can be applied to a lot, so that's a very general way of looking at it. As others have stated, it's a cultural, real thing, and if the implications are there to those who don't seek to move from them, then including it and doing it the right way is the only route to normalizing it instead of removing or going a "safe" pathway.

 

[Femto.]

2016. Where people are overly sensitive and get offended over everything.


.

Empathy, try it sometime son.

 

[Laughing Banana]

2016. Where people are overly sensitive and get offended over everything.


.

I bet you won't even post this kind of thing if what we're discussing is say, black or gay people. I bet you wouldn't even dare.

I guess there is just something about Muslims that make people so quick in dismissing/forgiving when they are being discussed.

 

[sirap]

For what it's worth, none of my Malaysian and Indonesian hijab wearing friends found this offensive (I don't think this criticism even registered in their minds. My girlfriend for example was super excited about getting to play a female character in Uncharted)

 

[SomTervo]

You're under stating the power the storytellers have. She could be posing as some other authority, maybe go in with a different pretense of why she's there. Or, alternatively, just create a different kind of set piece. Instead of sneaking in by blending in, she takes an unoccupied route.

If the only way you can tell a scene is by conforming to racist bias, it's perhaps more prudent to rework the scene. ND wasn't stuck having to have Chloe do what she did.

Can you tell me what racist bias is going on here?

Also how does Chloe know any route will be clear of soldiers? That's a risk you cant take in a warzone.

And do you know how much money/many resources it would take to pose as an authority? These treasure hunters aren't made of money.

Naughty Dog won't have haphazardky made this decision.

 

[Lanrutcon]

2016. Where people are overly sensitive and get offended over everything.
.

You're one of those accounts that never make it passed the page 1 graveyards in social issue threads.

 

[Laughing Banana]

For what it's worth, none of my Malaysian and Indonesian hijab wearing friends found this offensive (I don't think this criticism even registered in their minds)

Haha, yea, I don't even think of this when I first saw the trailer. What I had in mind was "bleh, corridor gameplay."

 

[vivekTO]

To the people who are trying to justify this using practicality and realism, your missing the point. Plenty of harmful stereotypes exist in real life. Plenty of big lipped black people like fried chicken, watermelon, and grape juice (because those foods are fucking awesome). But if an artist carelessly decided to put that into a scene in their game, that would raise some alarm. Domestic abuse and sexual harassment is real, flamboyant gay people with lisps are real.


It's not about what's real. It's about how what is presented and what it implies.

This isn't an agreement with the OP. I want to see more discussions before I make that call. But people trying to argue by using real life as a justification are going about it the wrong way.

On that thought, it's actually interesting how often real life comes up as a justification in many talks about these topics. Often one of the first things go you hear about women being portrayed as weak is people pointing out their bodies are physically inferior, or some such examples. It's a trend, I think.

I think the point raised by Op would have a point if the scenario presented is ,

A hispanic character wearing niqab enters an airport/facility and the guards stops them suspiciously. than it is somewhat sterotypical.

But the scene is from india, chloe is half indian and this is what it is, according to the tradition and custom of that place. Also not saying Op shouldn''t have conveyed his opinion , just putting my views on it.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Chloe wasn't wearing a hijab. She was covering part of her face with a dupatta. It's mainly/typically worn by south asian women with a shalwaar kameez which is exactly what she was wearing in the presentation.

It has no connection to any religion.

Edit: beaten.

Oh...so its not even religious then?

 

[Ishan]

You're under stating the power the storytellers have. She could be posing as some other authority, maybe go in with a different pretense of why she's there. Or, alternatively, just create a different kind of set piece. Instead of sneaking in by blending in, she takes an unoccupied route.

If the only way you can tell a scene is by conforming to racist bias, it's perhaps more prudent to rework the scene. ND wasn't stuck having to have Chloe do what she did.

Dude I'm indian and I perceive no friggin racist bias in someone showing small town India or certain run down parts of India how it is . And woman in India being shown in a salwaar and dupatta and use that to hide or sneak is perfectly fine and okay .

Women in India are very rarely authority in smaller towns .. A lot of these arguments against this scene are coming from a viewpoint of looking at this issue from a certain perspective . Which is not necessarily representative of the ground truth in India and other similar places . Plus it's already been established it's a dupatta not a hijab .

 

[MoonsaultSlayer]

It's a hijab worn in an Indian city . Muslims form a significant part of our population and if you go to heavily muslim dominated areas it's perfectly normal to see a woman in a hijab . So she could be blending in with her fellow city dwellers ... Think is making something out of nothing l

This is what I was thinking. Unless the OP thought she was in a European city?

 

[Ishan]

Haha, yea, I don't even think of this when I first saw the trailer. What I had in mind was "bleh, corridor gameplay."

Same didn't even cross my mind

Oh...so its not even religious then?

Nope .

 

[EventHorizon]

You're under stating the power the storytellers have. She could be posing as some other authority, maybe go in with a different pretense of why she's there. Or, alternatively, just create a different kind of set piece. Instead of sneaking in by blending in, she takes an unoccupied route.

If the only way you can tell a scene is by conforming to racist bias, it's perhaps more prudent to rework the scene. ND wasn't stuck having to have Chloe do what she did.

Infiltrate enemy base...
Pose as authority. I'm sure a female cop would be able to just walk right on in.

Basically what you are saying is never show portions of India that dress like this if you have a female character in the game. That's not discriminatory at all /s

 

[Veelk]

Can you tell me what racist bias is going on here?

Also how does Chloe know any route will be clear of soldiers? That's a risk you cant take in a warzone.

And do you know how much money/many resources it would take to pose as an authority? These treasure hunters aren't made of money.

Naughty Dog won't have haphazardky made this decision.

Honestly, I'm not saying there is racial bias.

My only points are that "it's real" isn't a real defense, nor is "well, how are they supposed to play this scene out" when, as creators, they don't have to play it out at all.

I'm currently holding no opinion on this and want to wait and see. But those two defenses are inherently weak arguments. They're frequently used in threads discussing this kind of subject and they don't work. The best defense that can be made will be made on the grounds of why this is a positive or atleast worthy portrayal on it's own merits.

 

[RocknRola]

True. That whole setting looks like 1971 small town India, does not look contemporary at all. I'd think its a city from Uttar Pradesh (our biggest state), the accents are hilarious Western And there was an annoying bit when they were bitching about the country But oh well, orientalism right?

I mean we know it's in the relative present as the UC series seems to play in the current world (give or take)

But the garments, in particular the dupatta (according to wiki) are definitely quite old: "The word dupatta is a combination of 'du-' meaning two, and 'patta' meaning strip of cloth, originally from Sanskrit.[2] Early evidence of dupatta veil or scarf can be traced to the Indus valley civilization, where the sculpture of the Priest King whose left shoulder is covered with some kind of a chaddar, suggests that the use of the dupatta dates back to this early Indic culture.". So yeah, pretty much existing before all this xenophobia BS we have today.

Accents are super hard to get right to be fair, at least in a way that they're understandable by the general audience and easy to recognize. For example, the film Silence (will release early next year) is supposed to be based on Portuguese missionaries going to Japan and, in short, getting "rekt". In any case, the Portuguese accents shown in the trailer are just awful and competely inaccurate. "Fewreiwra" is not you say "Ferreira". But again, accents (accurate ones) are hard. So I can't really give them much crap because of it.

 

[spineduke]

Honestly, I'm not saying there is racial bias.

My only points are that "it's real" isn't a real defense, nor is "well, how are they supposed to play this scene out" when, as creators, they don't have to play it out at all.

I'm currently holding no opinion on this and want to wait and see. But those two defenses are weak. The best defense that can be made will be made on the grounds of why this is a positive or atleast worthy portrayal on it's own merits.

I agree on that - it being used or not doesn't really mean anything. The question is more about if it propagates negative stereotyping. I'd still argue for it to be kept, but i can see the concerns around it.

 

[Glass Rebel]

Oh...so its not even religious then?

That's not the point. It is a Western piece of media produced by a Western company for a Western audience. It evokes a negative image that is ingrained in Western culture.

Some will agree, others will disagree. And that's fine.

 

[TheSpoiler]

Honestly, I'm not saying there is racial bias.

My only points are that "it's real" isn't a real defense, nor is "well, how are they supposed to play this scene out" when, as creators, they don't have to play it out at all.

I'm currently holding no opinion on this and want to wait and see. But those two defenses are weak. The best defense that can be made will be made on the grounds of why this is a positive or atleast worthy portrayal on it's own merits.

Wait and see for what? It's already confirmed by people who follow the culture as to what it is and what it entails. "It's real" is a a good "defense" simply because it's accurate to the culture, regardless of how the world takes it. Again, if ND does it right, why should they have to change it? Your suggestions, humorously enough, would mean less accurate portrayals and less normalizing, which is why those stereotypes exists.

Like, what are you even talking about?

 

[Henrar]

to be fair, don't terrorists use women in full body clothes as suicide bombers in places like pakistan and afghanistan?

They sometimes do (not only in Middle East - for example there was suicide bombing in Nigeria few years ago, where bomber hid bomb under hijab and no one noticed). It's a good disguise if used in that way.

 

[SomTervo]

Honestly, I'm not saying there is racial bias.

My only points are that "it's real" isn't a real defense, nor is "well, how are they supposed to play this scene out" when, as creators, they don't have to play it out at all.

I'm currently holding no opinion on this and want to wait and see. But those two defenses are weak. The best defense that can be made will be made on the grounds of why this is a positive or atleast worthy portrayal on it's own merits.

If those two defenses are weak then there is literally no strong defence. Those defences are based entirely on how the previous games' universes have worked and the fact that this isn't, you know, Hitman or something. And the other people in this thread who are from south eastern countries who say it legit makes sense.

Re your last sentence, you're probably over thinking it. This is likely a 10-15 minute segment in a several-hour experience. It probably won't get enough weight to judge in terms of positive or negative portrayal/justification.

 

[Ishan]

I mean we know it's in the relative present as the UC series seems to play in the current world (give or take)

But the garments, in particular the dupatta (according to wiki) are definitely quite old: "The word dupatta is a combination of 'du-' meaning two, and 'patta' meaning strip of cloth, originally from Sanskrit.[2] Early evidence of dupatta veil or scarf can be traced to the Indus valley civilization, where the sculpture of the Priest King whose left shoulder is covered with some kind of a chaddar, suggests that the use of the dupatta dates back to this early Indic culture.". So yeah, pretty much existing before all this xenophobia BS we have today.

Accents are super hard to get right to be fair, at least in a way that they're understandable by the general audience and easy to recognize. For example, the film Silence (will release early next year) is supposed to be based on Portuguese missionaries going to Japan and, in short, getting "rekt". In any case, the Portuguese accents shown in the trailer are just awful and competely inaccurate. "Fewreiwra" is not you say "Ferreira". But again, accents (accurate ones) are hard. So I can't really give them much crap because of it.

I thought they were pretty decently done .. Wasn't too over exaggerated but the def indian part was present ... Obviously not exactly but then again travelling to different parts of India you'll see a variety in accents .

Yeah these garments go way back in India but it's still very common salwaar kameez and sarees are the two main things women wear ... Even dupatta a . My mom my relatives my friends all of thEm I've seen on multiple occasions wearing a salwaar kameez with a dupatta ... It's very common .

 

[Necro900]

I agree on that - it being used or not doesn't really mean anything. The question is more about if it propagates negative stereotyping. I'd still argue for it to be kept, but i can see the concerns around it.

To racists even Chloe walking around in a dupatta doing absolutely nothing would enforce their views that "look at what they do to women, they force them to wear and blah blah".

What about creating media for people that actually use their brain and posing no limits to the artistic vision of developers? Especially if even the people that might get offended perceive no offense whatsoever (apart from OP, I guess, who didn't even know what he was specifically addressing, as it's not a religious piece of clothing).

 

[Glass Rebel]

To racists even Chloe walking around in a dupatta doing absolutely nothing would enforce their views that "look at what they do to women, they force them to wear and blah blah".

What about creating media for people that actually use their brain and posing no limits to the artistic vision of developers? Especially if even the people that might get offended perceive no offense whatsoever (apart from OP, I guess, who didn't even know what he was specifically addressing, as it's not a religious piece of clothing).

Nobody is posing limits on anyone.

 

[Fat4all]

What about creating media for people that actually use their brain and posing no limits to the artistic vision of developers?

I mean, you say that, but ND seem pretty damn conscious about the media they create and how it's reflected in society (if the interviews during development of TLOU are anything to go by).

It's not like creators don't appreciate the bigger picture.

 

[Palette Swap]

When I saw the trailer, my mind didn't jump to a specific religion so much as a specific set of culture and traditions applied in parts of the world.
Furthermore, the deception wasn't really that her clothing hid her features, it had more to do with the fact that this was the kind of clothing expected where she was.
So yeah, while I understand OP's concern, I don't think it was intended that way at the very least.

If anything, the whole thing (ingame and OP's concerns) speaks to how ultimately women are somehow always told how to dress.

 

[redcrayon]

To the people who are trying to justify this using practicality and realism, your missing the point. Plenty of harmful stereotypes exist in real life. Plenty of big lipped black people like fried chicken, watermelon, and grape juice (because those foods are fucking awesome). But if an artist carelessly decided to put that into a scene in their game, that would raise some alarm. Domestic abuse and sexual harassment is real, flamboyant gay people with lisps are real.


It's not about what's real. It's about how what is presented and what it implies.

This isn't an agreement with the OP. I want to see more discussions before I make that call. But people trying to argue by using real life as a justification are going about it the wrong way.

On that thought, it's actually interesting how often real life comes up as a justification in many talks about these topics. Often one of the first things you hear in threads about women being portrayed as weak in fiction is people pointing out their bodies are physically inferior, or some such examples. It's a trend, I think.

We're not talking about a stereotype based on a preference for something being associated with some people, it's a type of clothing associated with half the population in that area. A black person, in, for example, a game set in a western city not liking fried chicken would absolutely not stand out, at all (obviously), whereas a woman not wearing an ankle-length outfit and with her hair and face covered in the country that scene is set in would absolutely stand out. When she's obviously trying to achieve something covert, it makes sense. I see the point you're making about the realism defence in a fantastical game world, but I don't really think it's comparable here.

If Chloe had rocked up in skinny jeans and a crop top it wouldn't have really worked for the scene. Maybe they could have gone with her in black stealth gear, but I think the aim is also to depict her as someone who can do that kind of infiltration work (including fooling/fast-talking the guards at close range).

I agree that there's wider implications of associating subterfuge with such outfits for a largely western audience, but western ignorance of how half a society actually dresses (and their reasons for doing so) isn't a good enough reason to avoid something.

Not really sure about conflating 'women's bodies are weaker' with 'it's OK to wear local dress when hiding abroad' as a negative 'realism' trend. One is clearly ridiculous both in heroic fiction and considering how much more capable real women in peak physical condition are than a large chunk of general blokes like me, the other seems quite sensible both for actual spies and fictional stories concerning competent characters.

I think it'll be good to see how the scene is framed in context rather than on its own as a teaser.

 

[Kinyou]

You're under stating the power the storytellers have. She could be posing as some other authority, maybe go in with a different pretense of why she's there. Or, alternatively, just create a different kind of set piece. Instead of sneaking in by blending in, she takes an unoccupied route.

If the only way you can tell a scene is by conforming to racist bias, it's perhaps more prudent to rework the scene. ND wasn't stuck having to have Chloe do what she did.

Couldn't similar arguments be made for Mafia 3 or GTA featuring violent black protagonists? Surely that will also play into someones racial bias. Those issues would be easily solved by making the protagonist white, but I'm not sure if creatives should concern themselves with those biases if it would actually end up removing diversity from their game.

Nobody is posing limits on anyone.

Well there's always the "It's important to have a discussion about it" but what does that actually mean? What's the endgoal of it? That some perceive it as an intent on setting limits isn't all that far fetched

 

[Veelk]

Wait and see for what? It's already confirmed by people who follow the culture as to what it is and what it entails. "It's real" is a a good "defense" simply because it's accurate to the culture, regardless of how the world takes it. Again, if ND does it right, why should they have to change it? Your suggestions, humorously enough, would mean less accurate portrayals and less normalizing, which is why those stereotypes exists.

Like, what are you even talking about?

Again, lots of racist, sexist, and otherwise bigoted stuff is real. That it exists in the world means nothing. It's about how it's depicted.

But to your second part of the argument, to argue against me here is to say there is no other conceivable way to depict Chloe meeting Nadine in the city. No other possible way to sneak by. Honestly, even if you don't like my suggestions (which I disagree are as unrealistic as you say, because I never specified what kind of authority Chloe could pose under. Something as simple as a reporter with faked credentials. Elena managed it as a real reporter in uncharted 2), it's just intellectually dishonest that this is literally the only way this meeting could have happened.

Couldn't similar arguments be made for Mafia 3 or GTA featuring violent black protagonists? Surely that will also play into someones racial bias. Those issues would be easily solved by making the protagonist white, but I'm not sure if creatives should concern themselves with those biases if it would actually end up removing diversity from their game.

It should never not be a concern. It shouldn't stop developers from doing it if they believe in the project and know they haven't fallen into the pitfalls of those issues, but they will if the concern to avoid them isn't present.

 

[SomTervo]

When I saw the trailer, my mind didn't jump to a specific religion so much as a specific set of culture and traditions applied in parts of the world.
Furthermore, the deception wasn't really that her clothing hid her features, it had more to do with the fact that this was the kind of clothing expected where she was.
So yeah, while I understand OP's concern, I don't think it was intended that way at the very least.

If anything, the whole thing (ingame and OP's concerns) speaks to how ultimately women are somehow always told how to dress.

Remember there's also the disguise aspect. Hiding what she looked like was her actual goal. Even if it had been in another country she might have used something to disguise her face. Eg a scarf/buff in an Arctic country or a pollution mask in Shanghai or something. The dupatta fit this perfectly - it was function as well as form and culture.

 

[BigEmil]

I just thought of the way they used it just to blend in with the area to not raise suspicions

 

[Ishan]

3.imimg.com/data3/QA/LR/MY-3488804/heavy-dupatta-salwar-kameez-250x250.jpg


She's wearing a less fancy version of this in red . You don't see the bottom blue part till later and she has her dupatta wrapped around her face instead of just hanging around . Etc ... Ppl in India use dupatta a in many ways to shield their faces if needed (sun, pollution , privacy) or use it as a fashion accessory like a scarf equivalent etc etc . Varies . And it's all completely normal .

 

[SubbieD]

I mean we know it's in the relative present as the UC series seems to play in the current world (give or take)

But the garments, in particular the dupatta (according to wiki) are definitely quite old: "The word dupatta is a combination of 'du-' meaning two, and 'patta' meaning strip of cloth, originally from Sanskrit.[2] Early evidence of dupatta veil or scarf can be traced to the Indus valley civilization, where the sculpture of the Priest King whose left shoulder is covered with some kind of a chaddar, suggests that the use of the dupatta dates back to this early Indic culture.". So yeah, pretty much existing before all this xenophobia BS we have today.

Accents are super hard to get right to be fair, at least in a way that they're understandable by the general audience and easy to recognize. For example, the film Silence (will release early next year) is supposed to be based on Portuguese missionaries going to Japan and, in short, getting "rekt". In any case, the Portuguese accents shown in the trailer are just awful and competely inaccurate. "Fewreiwra" is not you say "Ferreira". But again, accents (accurate ones) are hard. So I can't really give them much crap because of it.

The dress she's wearing and what the others are wearing is pretty much any small town right now. I meant the architecture and milieu depicted don't look like modern India at all. And that town looks biggish in the bombing scenes - something like a Kanpur or something but from the 1970s.

 

[Necro900]

I mean, you say that, but ND seem pretty damn conscious about the media they create and how it's reflected in society (if the interviews during development of TLOU are anything to go by).

It's not like creators don't appreciate the bigger picture.

Of course they are, and they should be conscious. At the same time, they shouldn't refrain from putting something absolutely appropriate and culturally accurate in a game just because ignorant people will mistake it for what it's not.

Wouldn't changing their script and making Chloe infiltrate an indian military area in western clothes instead be an even more worrying case of caving in and implicitly representing what racists want to see?

 

[TheSpoiler]

Again, lots of racist, sexist, and otherwise bigoted stuff is real. That it exists in the world means nothing. It's about how it's depicted.

No disagreements there. But how it was depicted here wasn't even in a bad light or inaccurate. She was blending in with the local look of the city.

But to your second part of the argument, to argue against me here is to say there is no other conceivable way to depict Chloe meeting Nadine in the city. No other possible way to sneak by. Honestly, even if you don't like my suggestions (which I disagree are as unrealistic as you say, because I never specified what kind of authority Chloe could pose under. Something as simple as a reporter with faked credentials. Elena managed it as a real reporter in uncharted 2), it's just intellectually dishonest that this is literally the only way this meeting could have happened.

I mean, it's fair that there could have been other ways, but that doesn't mean that this one is necessarily wrong, and pulling suggestions to safe ones like "oh she's a reporter now" instead of having accurate representations is too safe for my taste. You have people actually commentating that it's culturally on point. I don't know why you seem to be keen on pulling up something that would make it safer and thereby less confrontational.

It should never not be a concern. It shouldn't stop developers from doing it if they believe in the project and know they haven't fallen J to the pitfalls of those issues, but they will if the concern to avoid them isn't present.

The concern was obviously there with ND because they were accurate. I agree that they need to be conscious of that, but that's what the developer did in this case, so...

 

[EventHorizon]

Honestly, even if you don't like my suggestions (which I disagree are as unrealistic as you say, because I never specified what kind of authority Chloe could pose under. Something as simple as a reporter with faked credentials. Elena managed it as a real reporter in uncharted 2), it's just intellectually dishonest that this is literally the only way this meeting could have happened.

Just admit you are wrong and move on. What enemy base is going to let a reporter walk in? The presumption is that they have guards there specifically to keep 'authorities' out. If the base is going to let you walk right on in for the explicit purpose of reporting on what they are doing, that defeats the whole tension of sneaking in.

 

[itsc4z]

watching psx this weekend, the reveal for the uncharted game had me hooked, constantly jumping from going thats lara to wait no thats not her for it to be finally revealed as a game in the uncharted series.

i make this thread to say I think Naughty Dog might not understand how it may have inadvertently confirmed quite harmful stereotypes that has actively isolated members of society like me.

the use of hijab/niqab, the headscarf and face veil, for the purpose for this trailer was to disguise, distract and deceive as she attempted to infiltrate a building that was under the guard of the state. it was precisely used in the way the general populace of europe and its governments suspect muslims of potentially using it for. NDs use of it in its reveal was precisely confirming that its quite reasonable to be suspicious.

its didnt seem intentional, at least i hope it wasnt. just that something that some women choose to wear out of devotion/piety was used as a throwaway disguise in a game for what the authorities in that game would have described as an act of terrorism.

i dont think asking about if i had issues with similar articles of religious clothing being used in games when theyve not really been the subject of intense scrutiny like us muslims have been under and continue to be under. nuns were not forced to be disrobed.

maybe one day gaming will be more conscious of our sensitivities.

I hope you never see the Amazon advert that's airing over here in the UK then.

 

[Ishan]

Again, lots of racist, sexist, and otherwise bigoted stuff is real. That it exists in the world means nothing. It's about how it's depicted.

But to your second part of the argument, to argue against me here is to say there is no other conceivable way to depict Chloe meeting Nadine in the city. No other possible way to sneak by. Honestly, even if you don't like my suggestions (which I disagree are as unrealistic as you say, because I never specified what kind of authority Chloe could pose under. Something as simple as a reporter with faked credentials. Elena managed it as a real reporter in uncharted 2), it's just intellectually dishonest that this is literally the only way this meeting could have happened.


It should never not be a concern. It shouldn't stop developers from doing it if they believe in the project and know they haven't fallen into the pitfalls of those issues, but they will if the concern to avoid them isn't present.

Reporters in various parts of India will still do this in parts of India . Plus many of them wear salwaar kameezes anyway... Cause it's an indian dress one were perfectly proud of and I don't like the idea that it can't be portrayed in media in this context ....... Also The point I'm trying to get across to you is in most parts of India this is our shirt and jeans . You wearing and shirt and jeans in those parts of India would be like a girl walking around in a Deep South us state wearing a salwaar kameez . It's just that jarringly different. You will bring a lot of attention to yourself .