5secondrulesucks
Banned
so what you guys are saying is im in politics no matter what!?!?!??!!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Exploitation Of Apolitical Politics (The Jimquisition)
- Thread starter Aurelian
- Start date
Closer
Member
If you play first or third person shooters, basically. Same as with any game with a good vs bad guys story.
Last edited:
Dacon
Banned
Best post in this thread.
lukilladog
Member
I don´t find the fact that companies will refuse to openly acknowledge their political agendas surprising or particularly interesting. 
LegendOfKage
Member
The idea that people with guns can better defend themselves from other people with guns isn't a political statement, it's just objectively true. What isn't objective truth is would a nation be better off without guns or with guns? That's definitely very subjective and political.
"If only our nation had outlawed guns decades ago, this wouldn't be happening. But the gun nuts just couldn't let go, and now here we are." or "Thankfully we never turned in our guns when asked. When you outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns. Mass shootings are awful, but they're the price we pay to defend our nation from itself."
Those would be political statements. And any game looking for a mainstream audience would be wise to avoid preaching either message. The alternative would be presenting both arguments in a fair and evenhanded manner, and letting people make up their own mind. That can be done. Captain America: Civil War is a great example.
DryvBy
Member
What they really want is to have left wing agendas shoved down everyone's throats. They don't want politics; they want their politics. That's the key thing. And if you don't fall in line with their politics, well they're the journalists and they'll just label you alt-right or GamerGate if you don't think Communism is good for your health.
Imagine if they made a game where you're constructing a wall to fortify the USA. That would be racist.
Imagine a game where you are saluting President Trump as a soldier. The melt down on other forums and in the media would be astronomical.
Imagine if they made a game where you're constructing a wall to fortify the USA. That would be racist.
Imagine a game where you are saluting President Trump as a soldier. The melt down on other forums and in the media would be astronomical.
Platinumstorm
Member
I'm a political enthusiast, and have no problem with politics being in games, but what I do have is people being upset about what kind of politics is within a game because it doesn't fit their style. I also have problems with people whining about every little detail that doesn't align with their viewpoints in a game.
Didn't think missing Nazi ensignia in a WWII game, as well as the overrepresentation of women in WWII was a good choice for BFV? Me neither, but I made the decision to play the game because I enjoyed it; not because I got wrapped up in a silly political and artistic choice. If you didn't because you were opposed to that; cool too, but we don't have to shout it at the walls.
Mad because women in Mortal Kombat aren't falling out of their outfits? Buzz off, don't play it. That is not an all-encompassing ideal, and if it's influenced by "inclusiveness" that's their choice.
Upset that some games include LGBT characters, or dare to show a same sex love interest or even DARE present the option? Buzz off too. Upset that Warcraft III doesn't have LGBT and minority representation in the humans of Azeroth? You can buzz off with that as well. Azeroth isn't the real world. Upset that a game dares to make a female character, or a non-white character the lead? You got the drill down by now! Buzz off!
Political tribalism itself sucks, and we shouldn't extend that into our gaming habits. Games we play and pay for are art, and if you don't agree with something so strongly, out of any of those idiotic above examples, then don't buy the game. You don't have to call for the next inquisition.
Didn't think missing Nazi ensignia in a WWII game, as well as the overrepresentation of women in WWII was a good choice for BFV? Me neither, but I made the decision to play the game because I enjoyed it; not because I got wrapped up in a silly political and artistic choice. If you didn't because you were opposed to that; cool too, but we don't have to shout it at the walls.
Mad because women in Mortal Kombat aren't falling out of their outfits? Buzz off, don't play it. That is not an all-encompassing ideal, and if it's influenced by "inclusiveness" that's their choice.
Upset that some games include LGBT characters, or dare to show a same sex love interest or even DARE present the option? Buzz off too. Upset that Warcraft III doesn't have LGBT and minority representation in the humans of Azeroth? You can buzz off with that as well. Azeroth isn't the real world. Upset that a game dares to make a female character, or a non-white character the lead? You got the drill down by now! Buzz off!
Political tribalism itself sucks, and we shouldn't extend that into our gaming habits. Games we play and pay for are art, and if you don't agree with something so strongly, out of any of those idiotic above examples, then don't buy the game. You don't have to call for the next inquisition.
5secondrulesucks
Banned
wait i thought you said you were a political enthusiast
Sqorin Hammerfarf
Banned
Unfortunately, free speech is now a conservative issue.
Kagey K
Banned
Well that sucks.. I was legitimately interested.
Perhaps better left for another thread.
Doomtrain
Member
I'm imagining games shoving in pro-life messaging. Maybe a sprinkling of Christianity and defenses of the second amendment? I'm sure someone else could elaborate on this in a much better manner, though.
Speaking as a lifelong liberal, this makes me incredibly sad and I'm not willing to give up on this yet.
... *cries softly*
FranXico
Member
I find that a bit of an exaggeration. Free speech has always been a human rights issue.
brap
Banned
I love how liberals act all smug about games 'oh if you don't want to play burka kombat 11 then fuck off' because it fits their political agenda then get all upset some random ass japanese game has big tits in it or other dumb shit. Hypocritical fuck heads are ok with politics unless it doesn't fit their agenda.
Last edited:
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
More vapid bollocks from Sterling.
Just because something can be looked at from political perspective it doesn't mean that it is seeking to make a political statement. Sometimes political imagery and scenarios are invoked simply to provide context and relatability to a dramatic scenario, other times it can be employed for simple novelty or topicality to draw attention despite not having a cogent, considered message to relay.
In games about shooting people/things its generally useful to have a pretext as to how and why this is happening! In games invoking the "hero's journey" template there needs to be an antagonistic force to overcome, which inevitably can be characterized as political because it needs to be greater than the individual hero or heroes for it to be a meaningful challenge.
Of course, all this is obvious and by the by. What Sterling is actually railing against is games not echoing the politics and sentiments that he feels need to be expressed in Trump's America. Which is of course fucking bullshit because its suggesting that creatives should be obliged to toe the party line.
The reality is that the Gaming Press is stridently political and almost entirely homogenous in its leftist outlook. Furthermore we're at a point where games and creators viewed to be expressing a view that is contrary to that orthodoxy will be punished and their work marginalized by these same people.
Just because something can be looked at from political perspective it doesn't mean that it is seeking to make a political statement. Sometimes political imagery and scenarios are invoked simply to provide context and relatability to a dramatic scenario, other times it can be employed for simple novelty or topicality to draw attention despite not having a cogent, considered message to relay.
In games about shooting people/things its generally useful to have a pretext as to how and why this is happening! In games invoking the "hero's journey" template there needs to be an antagonistic force to overcome, which inevitably can be characterized as political because it needs to be greater than the individual hero or heroes for it to be a meaningful challenge.
Of course, all this is obvious and by the by. What Sterling is actually railing against is games not echoing the politics and sentiments that he feels need to be expressed in Trump's America. Which is of course fucking bullshit because its suggesting that creatives should be obliged to toe the party line.
The reality is that the Gaming Press is stridently political and almost entirely homogenous in its leftist outlook. Furthermore we're at a point where games and creators viewed to be expressing a view that is contrary to that orthodoxy will be punished and their work marginalized by these same people.
Hari Seldon
Member
Politics is like sugar for your brain. In the short run it is highly tasty and low in fat so it seems good. But in the long run you get diabeetus and die. Best avoided and only consumed in small doses if you prioritize your mental health. If games were nothing but diatribes from insane CA people I would cut out gaming entirely. The last thing I want is for gaming to be the equivalent of gorging yourself on cable news all day.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
- More rights to the law enforcers and more surveillance
- Religious indoctrination of children in schools
- Lax fire arm laws
- National isolation
- Heavy handed approach with immigrants
- Strict drug laws
- Legal protection of religious festivities and sensibilities (e.g. the German "Tanzverbot", which is outlawing celebrating, showing motion pictures and more on certain Christian festivities such as Good Friday)
- Financially or ideologically supporting traditional family structures
- anti-lgbt positions (such as making it hard to transition, prohibiting gay marriage)
- Financially or ideologically supporting the majority religion (so in western states: Christianity)
Nowadays, conservatives often align with neoliberal views as well, but I think that does not necessarily need to be the case; a conservative could still be left on social security issues in principle.
There are seriously people who want to keep this bullshit law?^^
Also Germany needs to get rid of our business times and finally allow shops to open 24/7 yes also on sundays
Azula
Neo Member
This has already been said, but most of the time when people complain about politics being in games / art, they are talking about the way they are presented. If you have a really well written story, where the narrative itself reflects political themes, most people will not care. This is also the best way to change peoples minds, or get them thinking. It’s another thing when creators try overtly bombard you with it, and the story isn’t even very good. However, we can’t have this conversation in good faith, without talking about how overwhelmingly “left” the games industry is. Especially when we are talking devs and creators.
That in itself isn’t a problem (although ironically it’s not very diverse in terms of ideas and view points). The bigger issue is the evolution of modern politics, where “you are either with us, or against us”. The games industry as it stands now, overall does not tolerate conservative view points. Again it’s one thing if an entire industry happens to be leaning to one side, it’s another when the industry drives out these view points.
And the truth is, the majority of gamers and consumers are NOT overwhelmingly leaning just one way. Its more complex. So even if you are more left leaning, you are basically in an echo chamber, which then leads to games being used as an activist platform to cheer ideas that everyone is supposed to agree on, rather than be compelling art that wrestles with ideas (although some games are excellent in this regard).
So I think the reason you get some people who are guarded and don’t want political themes in their games, they are more than likely not opposed to politics in art, they just don’t like the way the industry is currently handling it. The other issue, is that because the entire industry from top to bottom leans the same way, you have a system that constantly ensures people don’t step out of line. So take for instance games journalism. They can go after devs or games that have social / political view points they don’t agree on, and you almost get no opposing view points in the media. It’s just an avalanche of people echoing the same view point in solidarity.
This basically leads to an almost purity test like environment. It also discourages discourse and people sharing different view points. Because you know the entire industry will come down on you. And again the problem with this, is that most gamers and consumers, are not specifically leaning to one side politically / socially.
Even if you are left leaning and agree with most of the industries view points, you can see this. Lastly, there has been a pretty radicalized evolution to how we identify with politics. It’s not a “we can agree disagree” environment. You either agree with me, or you are a bad person, is pretty much the way things are. So you will excuse some people, if they don’t want to openly “take a stance”. I’m very weary of journalists and activist, cheering on the view point of: “if you are silent and don’t take a political stand, you are guilty and bad”. I don’t like where that road leads us.
That in itself isn’t a problem (although ironically it’s not very diverse in terms of ideas and view points). The bigger issue is the evolution of modern politics, where “you are either with us, or against us”. The games industry as it stands now, overall does not tolerate conservative view points. Again it’s one thing if an entire industry happens to be leaning to one side, it’s another when the industry drives out these view points.
And the truth is, the majority of gamers and consumers are NOT overwhelmingly leaning just one way. Its more complex. So even if you are more left leaning, you are basically in an echo chamber, which then leads to games being used as an activist platform to cheer ideas that everyone is supposed to agree on, rather than be compelling art that wrestles with ideas (although some games are excellent in this regard).
So I think the reason you get some people who are guarded and don’t want political themes in their games, they are more than likely not opposed to politics in art, they just don’t like the way the industry is currently handling it. The other issue, is that because the entire industry from top to bottom leans the same way, you have a system that constantly ensures people don’t step out of line. So take for instance games journalism. They can go after devs or games that have social / political view points they don’t agree on, and you almost get no opposing view points in the media. It’s just an avalanche of people echoing the same view point in solidarity.
This basically leads to an almost purity test like environment. It also discourages discourse and people sharing different view points. Because you know the entire industry will come down on you. And again the problem with this, is that most gamers and consumers, are not specifically leaning to one side politically / socially.
Even if you are left leaning and agree with most of the industries view points, you can see this. Lastly, there has been a pretty radicalized evolution to how we identify with politics. It’s not a “we can agree disagree” environment. You either agree with me, or you are a bad person, is pretty much the way things are. So you will excuse some people, if they don’t want to openly “take a stance”. I’m very weary of journalists and activist, cheering on the view point of: “if you are silent and don’t take a political stand, you are guilty and bad”. I don’t like where that road leads us.
Last edited:
"There are so many people who cry "keep politics out of my games," but they also forget that many of the 'neutral' games they play are already political. They just don't always scream their ideologies from the rooftops."
You're already off to a bad start with this.
This is an immediate admission that you understand that when people say "keep politics out of my games" it is the screaming from the rooftops variety that they dislike and not the neutral and subdued variety.
I think Jim Sterling knows this too.
Your person who cries "keep politics out of my games" is a strawman already and you are only on paragraph one of post one in the thread.
Yes, you can argue that "Splatoon has loads of politics in it" but this requires an element of interpretation.
I always laugh when people say "of course Mario is political" because the "meaning" of Mario is so malleable that one could come up with multiple contradictory interpretations.
Of course, neither Splatoon nor Mario is shouting "don't forget to register to vote" from the rooftops. Maybe in Splatfests... I guess.
So, I am super excited for the release of Sekiro on Friday.
I'm taking the day off and I anticipate going into town to pick up my collectors edition and then having a nice lunch and then coming home to play the game and enjoy a few beers.
Will Sekiro have "politics" in it? I expect so. I would imagine that there are lots of lenses through which the story, setting and gameplay could be viewed.
Will this bother me? Probably not. Unless the story is fucking stupid then I'm going to be pretty oblivious to "politics" in the game.
HOWEVER. Should the game have some in your face message about some modern political talking point then I'm going to be a bit miffed. If there's some too on the nose commentary or some Jim Sterling style preaching and soapboxing in the game then I'm going to be saying "what the fuck, keep politics out of this".
I can't, for one second, believe that you don't already fucking know this.
When people say "keep politics out of my games" they generally mean clumsy, on the nose, preachy, annoying, barely disguised politics.
They don't generally mean "when you really really REALLY get down to it Donkey Kong Tropical Freeze is about immigration and I don't want that in my games".
I don't understand the point of trying to "start a debate" when the very first action is this blatant disingenuous crap.
"I wish developers would embrace their games' politics rather than pretend they don't exist to avoid upsetting potential buyers."
In the case of The Division 2 I think it's apparent that the game would maybe appeal more to conservative audiences?
Just the nature of the whole thing is almost pro 2nd Amendment, right?
As a developer though you might think "well that's kind of obvious but the game isn't about that".
From a marketing perspective you SHOULD try to avoid upsetting potential buyers.
You probably want people to buy your game and have fun and tell their friends.
From an artistic perspective you probably also want people to enjoy it.
That's gotta be a good feeling. "Hey, you know that game you made? Super fun to play. I love it."
The problem here seems to be that people want to force Ubisoft into saying they made a game for conservatives so that the dog-piling can begin.
You surely won't deny that there are certain elements within this community who would flip the fuck out if Ubisoft just said "yeah, our game is pro 2nd amendment"?
Is that even the "politics" of the game though?
It just seems to me that they wanted to create an interesting concept that an entertaining game can be built around.
Honestly, I don't think I need Ubisoft to take me aside every hour or so to remind me
I don't understand the reaction, bordering on rage, to a developer who just says "well our game doesn't have much to say about politics".
"You're game is political! Just admit it! Just fucking admit it you cowards!"
Jesus, who gives a fuck? They say their game has no major political statements so just leave it at that?
Fucksakes.
I just can't wrap my head around this determination to hold Ubisofts feet to the fire to get them to admit that their game has a political message.
In any other context it would almost be kind of disturbing.
Shit, Sterling even says if you're game isn't overtly political then someone will assign political meaning for you. Haha.
For that matter, he has a good general observation: the people who claim they're apolitical or neutral... well, they're lying. If you refuse to take a side, you're advocating for the status quo.
No. It's a fucking idiotic observation.
"They're lying". Kindly go fuck yourself.
America isn't the fucking center of the universe.
I refuse to "take a side" because I barely understand either side and the extreme views on both sides are fucking awful.
Why would I even bother to educate myself? I do not give a flying fuck about American politics and you can do whatever the fuck you want over there.
Same for other places like Japan, for example. I have no opinion on politics over there because I do not possess sufficient knowledge to form a solid argument and/or stance. You get it?
China. I understand things may be generally bad over there and the government seems like a bunch of cunts BUT I don't know enough to have a functional or fucking useful point of view and so, by definition, I am fucking apolitical in that regard. Jesus fucking Christ you colossal fucking dunce.
Fuck. You got me going there for sure.
Refusal to take a side can be down to not knowing enough to take a side.
Refusal to take a side can come down to not trusting either side.
Yeah, I don't want to be on the side of terrible people with dangerous views.
Equally though I don't want to be duped by fucking liars.
In this scenario unfortunately I get the sense that there is an attempt at duping by people like yourself and people like Jim Sterling.
Let's see. Take the most uncharitable view of your opposition and then the most charitable view of yourselves and then tell the world "if you're not with us then you are siding with them"? Fuck off.
LOL. I'm not going to be on the side of people who legitimately think that PewDiePie is a Nazi, Joe Rogan is Alt-Right, Boogie is a disgusting transphobic and homophobic centrist, Super Mario is sexist. Not going to happen.
I'm apolitical because I don't trust any of you to tell the fucking truth so I'm not going to "take a side" when both sides are acting like idiots.
Oh no, please tell me how I'm "lying"? Arsehole.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
What do you think is the reason it still exists and is not even seriously in discussion of getting removed? Conservatives, particularly in the CDU / CSU want to keep it. As want the churches. Heck, even some more conservative SPD politicians are in favour of keeping it.
#Phonepunk#
Banned
i don't really get what he's after. does he want the games press to talk more about game's already existing political content? if so then that's his job. he should do it better. does he want the directors to promote politics over other aspects of the game? if so then that's really just changing the way games are marketed, not made.
or is he actually suggesting game makers and developers change what they are doing to emphasis political aspects over other areas of game development?
cos yeah that last thing is just.... ugh... count me the fuck out...
and then in a few weeks of course he is going to bitch about "whiny gamers who always have to have their way threatening devs who just want to make a game". well isn't that exactly what he is doing here?
or is he actually suggesting game makers and developers change what they are doing to emphasis political aspects over other areas of game development?
cos yeah that last thing is just.... ugh... count me the fuck out...
and then in a few weeks of course he is going to bitch about "whiny gamers who always have to have their way threatening devs who just want to make a game". well isn't that exactly what he is doing here?
Last edited:
Winter John
Gold Member
In general I agree with the points this guy makes on his videos. The thing is I never get more than halfway through them because of the way he talks. My wife put it best when she saw me watching him. She said he sounds like he's late for a bus.
Because they are old and instead of holding onto actual useful conservative values like stopping mass immigration and regulate Immigration they hold onto this bullshit to show that they are still conservatives^^
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
What is useful or not depends on your goals. I am pretty sure that being supportive of this law is not (usually) virtue signalling, but actual political positions. Make no mistake, the CDU/CSU is pretty conservative. Just because Merkel was operating on a strategy of not resisting more progressive majority opinions on some tentpole issues, does not mean the party as a whole (or Merkel herself for that matter) is not a fundamentally conservative one. And before you bring up the gay mariage thing: Less than 30% of CDU/CSU agreed on that and that includes - of course - the homosexuals in the CDU/CSU as well, who were voting in their own interests, which often supercedes general political leanings.
I think a big part of this is people wanting to see exactly that.
I watched the video yesterday and from what I can remember he doesn't really lay out exactly his take on the politics of The Division 2.
Instead it's just "your game is political, stop squirming, just admit it". Admit it. Admit it. Your game is political.
We've got real Nazis roaming the streets and Ubisoft won't admit their game is political... REEEEEEEEE!
People know Tom Clancy's views. The guy was a conservative and a Republican. OK.
Given the nature of American society right now and the current culture in online spaces it's pretty clear why Ubisoft would not want to deal with this.
It seems like the logical conclusion is "don't release a game with Tom Clancy's name on it if you don't agree with his politics".
Honestly though I think they are all just clamoring for some excuse to go after Ubisoft and when Ubisoft have refused to play ball they are outraged anyway.
I honestly don't really get WHY the developers of The Division 2 need to be dragged out in public to admit "yes, your game is political and we think that a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun". So we can all go after them? What does it achieve?
Last edited:
Revolutionary
Member
Jim Sterling's entire shtick should be retitled "The Exploitation of Political Angst"
Burrito Bandito
Banned
Free Speech (former liberal pillar)
Personal Responsibility
Less World Policing (former liberal pillar)
Less Government
Anti-PC (former liberal pillar)
Pro Free Market
modern conservatives are essentially classical liberals who still love the 2nd amendment and capitalism. Unfortunately some people in the media and at tech companies have demonized these stances in order to gain political capital, a response to humiliating defeats stemming all the way back to 2014 when conservatives dominated the midterms.
As far as games go, i expect some level of politics but as with any media forms go, its always best (financially) to limit yourself as much as possible to be open to the largest possible consumer base. EA can attest to this with BFV. If they would have just called it Bad Company 3 and kept all the robo-women then no one would have cared and sales would have been off the charts. It was the intended rewriting of history just to insert their politics that people had a problem with.
Xenon
Member
I find him and Jim to be cut from the same cloth. Both provocateurs for their political viewpoints and gaming issues. Also they both can make great points when they are given something substantial to talk about. In this case Jim is reaching and The Quartering does a good job on calling him on it.
This argument that everything is political is a pointless one, since it completely discounts the meaning of something being political and the use of the word up until recently. I get why people are trying to make it. It's a semantic argument against those who are arguing against the current forcing of political viewpoints by many into all aspects of gaming: discourse, media, journalism, and development. But decrying everything is political doesn't change the fact that the word associated with media has an established meaning. It's a more deliberate and overt insertion of ones political views into a product. Here Jim is just being coy to play to his base and their political views. His video is political the Division 2 is not.
Burrito Bandito
Banned
we have real nazis roaming the street? what? You watch too much CNN man
Whitesnake
Banned
Good politics in fiction: The author making the reader think about complex socioeconimic issues while making it clear that there is no absolutely correct answer and that every solution comes with drawbacks. Making the reader/watcher/player question their philosophy and worldview and if those views would hold up in the world created by the author. The author can push the reader toward their own side, which inevitably happens, but the author still makes a point to be fair and show flaws of their own political ideals and the benefits of another.
Bad politics in fiction: The author only showing their side of the political spectrum and trying to beat into the reader’s head that the author’s view is the correct one.
Worst politics in fiction: The author creates their work already under the assumption that their worldview is the absolute good, and anyone who disagrees with them is evil. The author makes no attempt to be subtle or discreet. The author has no interest in convimcing the reader. The author essentially creates a masturbatory self-insert fantasy in which they fight against caricatures and strawmen of a real-life ideology that they dislike. All this while trying to insert as many of their own side’s political talking points as possible.
Most people, when saying “don’t make it political”, are talking about the latter two.
Last edited:
Sqorin Hammerfarf
Banned
I think that what it all comes down to is that modern politics in gaming (or anything really) has become an extension of the Mary Sue trope, only instead of it being author inserts banging the main characters and saving the day, it's their ideology.
Pejo
Member
I feel like people misunderstand the call for less politics in games. I don't mind politics that are related to a story in the game, of the game's own universe. What I don't like would be something like "ORANGE MAN BAD" shit that is rammed into a story that's completely out of place and only a nod to "Correct" real world political views.
Stories have forever used racism, class wars, and other political based points in storytelling. Star Wars is a story about a rebellion uprising against a corrupt governing body. Blade Runner covers how a group of people become marginalized and mistreated, etc etc etc.
Throughout the history of fiction, politics have either been a central piece of the story or important for world building. It hasn't been until the last few years though that the connection to real world current events has become so on-the-nose that you just have to groan when you see it pop up. They're starting with a political motive and then writing the story around it instead of having an interesting story and using political motives as a plot device.
Anyways, this is just my opinion, of course.
Stories have forever used racism, class wars, and other political based points in storytelling. Star Wars is a story about a rebellion uprising against a corrupt governing body. Blade Runner covers how a group of people become marginalized and mistreated, etc etc etc.
Throughout the history of fiction, politics have either been a central piece of the story or important for world building. It hasn't been until the last few years though that the connection to real world current events has become so on-the-nose that you just have to groan when you see it pop up. They're starting with a political motive and then writing the story around it instead of having an interesting story and using political motives as a plot device.
Anyways, this is just my opinion, of course.
Xenon
Member
What you haven't seen the news ! They had tiki torches and they are spreading out all across the nation. The Nazis are coming
Shai-Tan
Banned
I don't see how it's different from tv and movies. Having cops/agents/whatever acting outside of normal bounds of professional roles isn't a commentary on what we want out of society - it's a pretext for our interest in the action genre. To argue that everything is political is presupposing either second order effects on political ideology of, for example, use of guns in non serious action or an implicit argument for games to be more realistic. Saying "everything is political" is a placeholder for those unargued assumptions.
The Division could have had a more interesting narrative apart from the silly action but the way that these dumb discussions unfold, "ludonarrative dissonance" is then used as a bludgeon to question why there is a gap between the structure of action and more serious thinking about human nature and psychology in storytelling as if the scenarios developers design weren't contrived to serve the action genre first. Sorry, there isn't enough substance in the absurd settings in games set up to facilitate action to satisfy your desire for relevant political commentary.
Consider what the connection is between the story in Bioshock and what you do in the game. Almost nothing. Complaining about shooting random dudes in The Division is like complaining that the splicers in Bioshock aren't human enough. What makes action compelling isn't necessarily connected to what makes story compelling, hence the intentional unreality in the action genre.
The Division could have had a more interesting narrative apart from the silly action but the way that these dumb discussions unfold, "ludonarrative dissonance" is then used as a bludgeon to question why there is a gap between the structure of action and more serious thinking about human nature and psychology in storytelling as if the scenarios developers design weren't contrived to serve the action genre first. Sorry, there isn't enough substance in the absurd settings in games set up to facilitate action to satisfy your desire for relevant political commentary.
Consider what the connection is between the story in Bioshock and what you do in the game. Almost nothing. Complaining about shooting random dudes in The Division is like complaining that the splicers in Bioshock aren't human enough. What makes action compelling isn't necessarily connected to what makes story compelling, hence the intentional unreality in the action genre.
Sqorin Hammerfarf
Banned
Especially if you massage the frenulum.
zenspider
Member
I hate this argument. Tom Clancy games are not political in the modern context. They are bombastic fiction in a political setting. Just like Ghosts of Tsushima is not a Japanese game - there is little to no extra meaning to be teased out from what is plainly on offer.
Gamers are not against politics in games. They're against the politicization of games.
Fuck that.
I refuse to take a side because 1) they are not diametrically opposed from my personal position - they're vanilla and chocolate ice cream, and I asked for dinner.
2) There are good ideas and bad ideas on both 'sides'. The current climate of the sides are incompatible with this fact.
3) For all my beliefs - what the fuck do I know? I could be wrong, and I'm happy to be if the result is better.
4) If we are going to survive this bizzare age of weaponized manipulation and attention warfare, 'picking a side' is a tactical mistake.
We should bolster nuanced positions in ourselves and in others, not voluntarily walk into pens and get rocked.
Gamers are not against politics in games. They're against the politicization of games.
Fuck that.
I refuse to take a side because 1) they are not diametrically opposed from my personal position - they're vanilla and chocolate ice cream, and I asked for dinner.
2) There are good ideas and bad ideas on both 'sides'. The current climate of the sides are incompatible with this fact.
3) For all my beliefs - what the fuck do I know? I could be wrong, and I'm happy to be if the result is better.
4) If we are going to survive this bizzare age of weaponized manipulation and attention warfare, 'picking a side' is a tactical mistake.
We should bolster nuanced positions in ourselves and in others, not voluntarily walk into pens and get rocked.
Fuz
Banned
zenspider
Member
I like a lot of what you're saying here. I think it avoids the trap, but I don't think you're marking it precisely.
The "save the princess" trope is not political. It's a politicization. The important difference to me is that everything gets an abstractable, interpretable representation except the target - it remains literal. Everything gets to mean something else.
Political statements have intent. They don't just appear in the world without a politicized mind interpreting.
Last edited:
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
You've done an excellent job exposing this for what it is: the ideology of the deconstructionist, yet another mutant offspring of post-modernism.
People would do well to educate themselves on the ideologies that've swept through these circles over the past 20 years in an effort to understand the source material these folks are parroting (whether intentionally or not).
Shai-Tan
Banned
it fits in a more generalized phenomenon called "suspicious reading" or "hermeneutics of suspicion"
https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/are-we-postcritical/
postmodernism as bogeyman is just another form of this phenomenon, by the way
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...6e177f3081c_story.html?utm_term=.a04eacc2d68c
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opi...nt-a-vile-cancerous-doctrine/article37272519/
DunDunDunpachi
Patient MembeR
I'm very familiar with hermeneutics and critical theory, as well as postmodernism itself.
The reason why I specifically likened it to deconstruction is because of Jim's flip-flopping abuse of the term "political" to fit his assertions as he sees fit, which is what
Vampire On Titus
and others pointed out. It is a tactic of deconstruction and utterly betrays the basics of hermeneutics. Hermeneutics itself is merely the agreed-upon rules for dissecting these texts. It is not absolute. It can be twisted and abused, just like anything else.
Granting Jim the benefit of the doubt as a "suspicious reader" is incredibly generous.
KoolAidPitcher
Member
I remember this guy. He said extremists like Anita Sarkeesian would never take our games away, right? Looks like he was wrong on that one. Funny how things change.
We need to renounce all forms of extremism both on the left and right. Have artistic vision and creative freedom rule and let the free market decide what content is in games.
We need to renounce all forms of extremism both on the left and right. Have artistic vision and creative freedom rule and let the free market decide what content is in games.
Last edited:
Doomtrain
Member
Like a lot of others have said, what bothers me about videos like this is that Jim doesn't just want games to explore politics; he wants them to parrot HIS politics in the most milquetoast, black-and-white terms.
There are two major positions I see journalists espouse a lot, often in the same breath:
1. Everything is political and it's the job of a developer to shove politics into their game
2. Game devs/content creators with the "wrong" political viewpoints need to keep their repugnant opinions to themselves because THINK OF THE CHILDREN
Look at the reaction to The Last Night. Based on this video, Jim should be praising that game, right? Right?
There are two major positions I see journalists espouse a lot, often in the same breath:
1. Everything is political and it's the job of a developer to shove politics into their game
2. Game devs/content creators with the "wrong" political viewpoints need to keep their repugnant opinions to themselves because THINK OF THE CHILDREN
Look at the reaction to The Last Night. Based on this video, Jim should be praising that game, right? Right?
Jubenhimer
Member
Well yes, in a way, all media has some form of political meaning be-it intentional or not. But there's a difference between making a world and cast of characters that happen to reflect your own beliefs, and then there's blatant, in-your face propaganda. It's the latter that people are sick of. People should be allowed to make whatever they want. It's when they try to use their platform to force their ideology down everyone elses throat that it becomes a problem.
Screamer-RSA
Member
Lol he called gaf resetera the other day. So who knows where he came from.
Halo is Back
Member
If you do not want “politics” or controversial topics in your games then don’t call the medium an art form
Similar threads
- Locked