Segata Sanshiro
Member
For every extra copy someone buys, I will purchase and void the contents of an aerosol spray can.
MWUUUAAHAHHAHA
MWUUUAAHAHHAHA
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Should we boycott Shadow Complex?
- Thread starter Coins
- Start date
MightyHedgehog said:
What Peter David had to say was interesting, but I can never understand people who suggest that boycotting products is somehow opposed to the freedom of speech and expression. I cannot begin to understand his argument that boycotts are about the person and not their ideals or ideas. What reason exactly is there to dislike Card other than his ideas and ideals? Does he also cheat at cards? (Though I suppose that too would have something to do with his ideals and ethics.) Freedom of speech and expression is not the same thing as freedom from disapproval. What exactly is he suggesting we do to show our disapproval instead? That everyone who disagrees with Card should fund a video game of their own and use the profits to oppose him?
It has nothing to do with instilling "fear of financial ruin." Nobody is naive enough to think OSC is going to go bankrupt because of this or any of his opinions. It's about not wanting to finance active attempts at bigotry.
BlackTyrano
Member
Ogrekiller said:
I had never even heard of Empire before this game was made, and I'm sure there are a lot of others who are the same way. Seems like the game is quite effective at advertising Card's universe.
I'm considering not buying the game, but probably more because I don't want to spend $25 on points for a $15 game.
Red Nightmare
Banned
Yes. You did misunderstand. Choosing not to purchase something out of principle is making a personal stand; it is not a boycott. Everyone of course is free to make personal stands out of principle. I do it without trying to force my views on others.Sneds said:
A boycott is a different animal entirely. It is an organized movement designed to punish or force change through financial intimidation. It is far better to force change via persuasion. Win the battle of ideas, if you can.
What Peter David wrote is by far the most sensible thing I've read in this thread.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
Hey guys, remember that thread I created where I got mad because I said people rarely post in serious hard hitting discussions while threads that are just "lulz gags" get an ass ton of posts in just one day?
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Boycott is not a private choice, a boycott is an organized protest meant to bring about change through financial hardship, it isn't just choosing to not buy something. Any systematic campaign to prevent purchases of an artistic piece that is driven by the personal opinions or actions of the artist when the piece does not express or further those opinions is a hindrance to artistic expression.Sneds said:
Red Nightmare said:
poppabk said:
Okay thanks for clarifying.
I would say though, that it seems as though the people in this thread who have chosen not to buy SC because of Card's views don't actually seem to want to organise a boycott. They're not a 'group' but just individuals who have come to the decision because of their personal choice.
Also, if all people are doing is informing people of Card's views and then allowing them to make up their own mind, I don't see that as being a hindrance to artistic expression. Therefore, in this case I still think that David's argument was poor.
Edit: I would see a campaign to ban the game, or the Empire series in general, as hindering freedom of expression but obviously no one has even remotely suggested that.
dark10x said:You know, I never realized that the Mustard brothers were also involved in the creation of Advent Rising. I always wondered what had happened to those creators...
At least we know that demi is on our side with this one.
He didn't create the "universe" on which Empire was based, by the way.
Furthermore, any PR he may be doing for the game is likely designed to help push his next book.
So who all decided to boycott the game?
I didn't say he created the universe of Empire, I said Shadow Complex in that he states in his interview that he worked to write Shadow Complex into the Empire universe.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002LIT3F2/?tag=neogaf0e-20BlackTyrano said:
You know, the responses to this are just sad. HURR HURR IMA BUY 20 COPIEZ, etc.
The OP actually has a decent discussion point, and if people were actually capable of it, this could have been an interesting thread.
For the record, I don't really agree with the OP. I'm more a 'take the artist and his work separately' type of guy. Though I admit learning this about Card from this thread is disappointing (Ender's Game is one of my favorite books). Still, it is totally reasonable for someone who feels strongly about gay rights to have this viewpoint on the subject.
But really, the guys getting angry at the OP in this thread make it full of stupid.
I mean, you idiots are making Drinky look rational and level headed for God's sake!
The OP actually has a decent discussion point, and if people were actually capable of it, this could have been an interesting thread.
For the record, I don't really agree with the OP. I'm more a 'take the artist and his work separately' type of guy. Though I admit learning this about Card from this thread is disappointing (Ender's Game is one of my favorite books). Still, it is totally reasonable for someone who feels strongly about gay rights to have this viewpoint on the subject.
But really, the guys getting angry at the OP in this thread make it full of stupid.
I mean, you idiots are making Drinky look rational and level headed for God's sake!
thebaroness
Member
I think the Gaygamer and Gamasutra articles are some of the most mature and well thought out pieces related to games I've read in a while.
It's ok to express you personal beliefs in regards to games, but do a bit of research before your decision. I think the solution proposed by Gaygamer is a perfect compromise. Play the game, enjoy it, have fun, and donate a few dollars to a gay or same sex marriage charity so that you know where you support is going. Not ALL the proceeds are going to Card, many other talented individuals worked on Shadow Complex deserve their wages too.
I am a fan of Card's Ender series, but was torn when I found out his extremist views towards gay people. Especially since the entire series is about acceptance. I played and enjoyed Shadow Complex, however his personal opinions are absolutely absurd.
It's ok to express you personal beliefs in regards to games, but do a bit of research before your decision. I think the solution proposed by Gaygamer is a perfect compromise. Play the game, enjoy it, have fun, and donate a few dollars to a gay or same sex marriage charity so that you know where you support is going. Not ALL the proceeds are going to Card, many other talented individuals worked on Shadow Complex deserve their wages too.
I am a fan of Card's Ender series, but was torn when I found out his extremist views towards gay people. Especially since the entire series is about acceptance. I played and enjoyed Shadow Complex, however his personal opinions are absolutely absurd.
BlackTyrano
Member
Costanza said:
Cool, thanks for the link!
Skiptastic
Member
Hey, you got your OT mixed up in my Gaming!
Hey, you got your Gaming mixed up in my OT!
I didn't buy the game directly, but my roommate bought it after playing the demo (using my MS Points) and I played it and it is a lot of fun. Sorry to hear that people will be boycotting it, but every principle has a sacrifice, I suppose.
Hey, you got your Gaming mixed up in my OT!
I didn't buy the game directly, but my roommate bought it after playing the demo (using my MS Points) and I played it and it is a lot of fun. Sorry to hear that people will be boycotting it, but every principle has a sacrifice, I suppose.
Wow, Peter David's argument is incredibly sloppy.
Yes, he actually is calling for gay-rights supporters to give money to OSC because of his anti-gay views.
"Skip buying" = boycott? And I doubt someone like David would actually buy from an avowed white supremacist, for instance.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Huh.
Now I don't want to buy the game thanks to Peter David treating me like a petulant child.
That's a new and interesting twist.
Now I don't want to buy the game thanks to Peter David treating me like a petulant child.
That's a new and interesting twist.
FoneBone said:
It doesn't quite apply to this issue, but there is some merit to the idea Peter David is trying to convey. I think there are times where people are too quick to play the victim card because either that's whats expected or its the best way to advance their agenda.
Case in point. Kids here in the states may remember Don Imus getting into hot water for calling the Rutgers women's basketball team "nappy headed hos" as his poor attempt at a joke. No doubt it was racially insensitive and Imus deserved ridicule for making the statement. However I was far more disgusted with Rutgers coach C Vivian Stringer who quickly played the victim card, said the comments ruined her players selft esteem, their season, and God knows what else. She basically milked it for all the exposure she could get. She also gave those words that Imus said all the power in the world. Why not instead admonish him for his idiocy but reaffirm that there is nothing he or anyone else could say that would take away from their pride or their accomplishments. Instead she pandered for attention. I've grown tired of people playing the victim to see what they can get out of it.
Again, what I've stated doesn't quite apply here, but there are other stronger ways to voice your convictions or believes than crying "I have been wronged, someone give me something!"
mattiewheels
And then the LORD David Bowie saith to his Son, Jonny Depp: 'Go, and spread my image amongst the cosmos. For every living thing is in anguish and only the LIGHT shall give them reprieve.'
These poor guys...I hoped they learned a lesson. Never get involved with orson scott card. I hope it doesn't affect them too much.
wonderkins
Member
And this thread has convinced me that should I encounter an opposing viewpoint to my own, I should buy things. It makes me feel better to have my purchasing habits dictated by a contrarian response. Makes me feel in control of myself.Woo-Fu said:
Orson Scott Card sounds confused and ignorant on the matter. There are people that preach this bullshit, though. I had to attend an event with Christopher West as a speaker. Now, I'm basically an agnostic, but a friend of mine really wanted me to come with her that night so I did. When he started talking about homosexuals, I was pretty floored by what he had to say. It sounds very much in line with what Card has stated in many of the quotes in this thread. Most of the people in there seemed to agree as well, which was even worse.
I thought he was a lunatic, but I was also clearly in the minority. I don't think all of the people attending were bad people, however. The way someone is brought up can result in this line of thinking and it's a very delicate situation. The way some of the people react in this thread would, unfortunately, only push them to more strongly hold onto their beliefs.
I thought he was a lunatic, but I was also clearly in the minority. I don't think all of the people attending were bad people, however. The way someone is brought up can result in this line of thinking and it's a very delicate situation. The way some of the people react in this thread would, unfortunately, only push them to more strongly hold onto their beliefs.
ShockingAlberto
Member
If you boycott Liverpool, how are you going to get your five pound Primark dress clothes?!painey said:
Darkmakaimura
Can You Imagine What SureAI Is Going To Do With Garfield?
You know what bothers me about all this...
If the bad guys in the game are left-wing radicals, then why would they
If the bad guys in the game are left-wing radicals, then why would they
want to attack San Francisco, one of the most liberal cities in America? Wouldn't they want to attack a southern state or other traditionally conservative city?
divisionbyzorro
Member
If there's one thing I've learned about these sorts of debates arguments, it's that nobody involved actually gives a crap about the other side's opinion. We may tolerate the other guy, but we have our feet planted in the ground and will refuse to budge. Some will do so politely, some not so much, but nobody actually cares about the other guys opinion. We only care about our own and once we have an opinion, we will not be swayed.
So for what it's worth, I completely agree with Peter David's first comment on Christian's article. If you personally can't purchase the item in good conscience, then don't. But an organized boycott is just what he says: a vengeful, spiteful, I-will-hit-you-back-because-you-hit-me-first type of attitude and isn't the way to advance any sort of meaningful discussion.
So for what it's worth, I completely agree with Peter David's first comment on Christian's article. If you personally can't purchase the item in good conscience, then don't. But an organized boycott is just what he says: a vengeful, spiteful, I-will-hit-you-back-because-you-hit-me-first type of attitude and isn't the way to advance any sort of meaningful discussion.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Don't get me started. Finding out OSC is such a repugnant person made me feel kind of...betrayed, I guess.mugwhump said:Aw, man
You just ruined orson scott card for me dude
I think because Ender's Game was about being different, and how if you're different, the people ostracizing you are the ones who need to change, not you. There's nothing wrong with being unique. That was a good lesson as a kid.
Now it's fifteen years later and I discover my interpretation of the book is very different from what Card intended.
stupei said:
In that case, it's dangerous to use the word "boycott". The topic title, "Should we boycott Shadow Complex?" implies an organized movement.
You can choose not to buy a product for any reason in the world, as that's your personal decision, just as you can choose to buy a product for any reason. If you don't personally want to give any portion of your money to Orson Scott Card, then skip Shadow Complex. You're not doing it because you want it to matter to him, but you're doing it for yourself. That's fine.
Boycotts generally aren't meant to assuage our personal consciences, though. They're meant to deliver a message to those affected that they are doing something wrong. They're meant to inflict financial harm to the designated target. If they don't do any harm, then what is their purpose?
Some in this thread have said that they want to send a message to Chair that there are consequences for associating with Orson Scott Card. That has nothing to do with Shadow Complex itself, or any ideas espoused by the game. The game, on its own, espouses no political ideology and doesn't discuss homosexuality ever. Their target is no longer the ideology that Card advocates and supports monetarily, it is Card himself. Those in favor of a boycott (in the true sense of the word) seek to financially damage him by removing him from his business associates, and to financially damage those who have associated with him.
As David said, this is counterproductive. It's a spiteful action targeted against a person, not an ideology. Because Card is a prominent member and organizer for a group they disagree with, they send the message that they will oppose him in whatever he does, whether it is related to that organization or not. If they seek to advance the cause of civil rights for homosexuals through their boycott, they will fail, because by demonizing the individual and his associates, irrespective of their policies in this particular case, they will only draw the battle lines against them.
I am certain this is not the first time that Orson Scott Card has heard that people disagree with him vehemently over what he has said. And given the spectacular failure of Advent Rising, the last project Chair's founders undertook with Card, I don't think that financial troubles are enough of a motivation for them to stop working with a man they clearly respect as an author and writer, however they feel about his politics.
If a boycott targets individuals instead of the policies it claims to oppose, I believe it is misguided and doomed to fail in its aims.
What's ridiculous is that I can't see a way in which this game benefited from Card's involvement. Based on the demo: The back-story and setup is retarded and everything about it screams boiler-plate action film. He didn't even take the time (or Chair didn't want to pay him) to write the actual story or dialog and yet they've not really trumpeted the person who did, Peter David, who is also a well-respected writer. Furthermore, even if they did put Card's name out front and center (which they haven't), it's a relatively new IP without the name recognition of Ender's Game, so I can't see that being much a draw for people otherwise predisposed to look it over. I'm not saying no one should ever make a game with him, but utilize him, his talents and his name correctly.
sonicmj1 said:
I think an important point with Card though, is that from what I have been led to believe, he personally funds a homophobic/SSM campaign. Therefore, if Card does (and we don't know this) benefit from sales of Shadow Complex, by buying the game the purchaser is quite directly funding this campaign.
Therefore, financially damaging Card isn't necessarily an act of vengeance due to conflicting viewpoints, but actually preventing your own money being used to aid a cause you vehemently disagree with. Now I don't know the agreement Card has in terms of moneys received for SC but if the above is accurate then I think people's decision not to buy the game in order to prevent Card gaining their money is fair enough.
Father_Brain
Banned
I would never have expected Peter David to agree with the OP, in light of his own involvement with Shadow Complex. I am, however, quite surprised at how poorly reasoned his arguments are, as well as the sheer volume of words he's devoted to attacking strawmen. I really expect better from him.
In addition to the bizarre "we should give money to bigots because we disagree with them" argument and the ridiculous assertion that the "financial ruin" of OSC is the OP's goal, he also seems to be under the impression that this is only about OSC's stated opinions, not his anti-gay activism.
In addition to the bizarre "we should give money to bigots because we disagree with them" argument and the ridiculous assertion that the "financial ruin" of OSC is the OP's goal, he also seems to be under the impression that this is only about OSC's stated opinions, not his anti-gay activism.
Yes, the "victim card". Where a the victim(s) grievances are used against them as a weapon. Thus demonizing them as well as dismissing their actual grievances that they wished to be addressed in the first place. As well as causing more hatred to said people/person unless they just shut up and learn to live with said grievance. Well played my intellectually and morally bankrupt friend.truly101 said:
Please don't use that term again in civl discourse. It ony outs you as a talk-radio listening fool to everyone in the thread.
Sneds said:
That's why I can understand it as a personal decision, as opposed to an organized boycott.
Boycotting Shadow Complex in a large way and denying money to Chair as a whole solely because of funds Card may or may not be receiving, sends the wrong message. Since Chair (and Epic, and Microsoft Game Studios) have shown no indication of supporting Card in his views, and since Shadow Complex, as a media product, does not support Card in his views, attempting to financially impact Shadow Complex and all those who have worked on it solely because Card may or may not use money from it to fund his anti-homosexual agenda seems, to me, far removed from any opposition to Card's agenda in particular.
The process that would support a mass boycott would logically lead to a boycott on anything Card does, ever, since allowing him to earn any money could possibly allow him to use those funds for his politics. As an individual, not giving him your money is one thing. Applying that to a wider boycott with the goal of preventing him from earning money from anyone for anything he does goes beyond targeting his policies, and targets him.
I don't think most posters here who have chosen not to purchase the game because of its affiliation with Card support a wider boycott against the game. Considering that the possibility of a boycott is in the thread's subject, though, I think it's worth addressing.
ShockingAlberto said:
Yeah, it was pretty weird, Ender's Game seemed like a bog-standard children's book with the standard heavy handed morals. I don't know what OSC intended the moral lesson to be, but I do know that the book itself is mediocre and unremarkable at best, so I don't care that much.
As for this seemingly never ending thread, I realized something...
What if the OP is actually a viral marketer for Shadow Complex? By posting such a self-righteous and generally retarded original post, he knew that people would react with reverse psychology and purchase the game even if they had otherwise not intended to! Look at how many people have said they are going to purchase copies of the game because of the thread, at least a dozen, and I haven't read the vast majority of it. Whereas how many have said they were going to buy one and decided not to as a result? I haven't seen one post saying that.
My apologies Coins. I thought you were just being stupid with the OP, but clearly you're a very skilled viral marketer.
Yes, I am kidding.
deadatom said:
I don't really listen to talk radio much outside of NPR. However if you think some people won't exploit said grievances to their advantage for either attention or gain, you're a bit naive. However, I never said that Coach Stringer should just "shut and take it" I said that she eagerly embraced the role of victim to get attention for her basketball team. It would have been a stronger statement to me if she had said that there was nothing Imus or anyone else could say that would take away from her or her team's dignity. Compare it to the actual prejudice and hatred that the Texas Western basketball team faced in 1966 and and how they handled it, its a world of difference. Try reading the full post next time instead of going for the typical knee jerk reaction.
Unless there is some overtly offensive content in the game, or a subversive message that is hateful, boycotting this game because of a partial creator's (albeit out there) political views is asinine.
You could find contributors with political views or agendas you don't agree with attached to anything you enjoy as a consumer.
You could find contributors with political views or agendas you don't agree with attached to anything you enjoy as a consumer.
Freedom of conscious is freedom for wallet...sonicmj1 said:
It should be a full blown boycott. The battlelines have already been drawn by the man himself! And you think people should overlook that? A boycott sends the right message. That we don't tolerate bigots. That we don't support bigots. If yyou want to personally defend a bigot that is your problem. We, as a civil society, can have standards above your own standards of defending the indefensibles WALLET!
sonicmj1 said:
The way you phrase it though makes it sound like not buying Card's products/affiliated products is an active pursuit. All we're talking about is not buying something. Up to this point in time I've never bought anything (at least to my knowledge) that Card has been involved with. This hasn't been due to his views/campaigns because I was unaware of them. But if in future I do avoid purchasing anything he's involved with because of these views, I don't see this as a problem. He's not owed my money. I'm not depriving him of something that he deserves. Whatever reason I have for not wanting to give him money is valid. Other people may feel the same. If Card's publisher etc, then decide that the loss in revenue means working with Card is no longer profitable, then I'm not going to feel bad about that. It wasn't my aim to get him fired even though it might have been a natural consequence. This is obviously all hypothetical.
sonicmj1 said:
I think I'm failing to grasp a clear distinction between 'group boycott' and 'personal decision not to buy'. After all, a group boycott, is just a collection of individuals who have chosen not to buy.