An actual "Communist" game to trigger the GG/right wing crowd?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Awkward phrasing. I mean like...

You shouldn't try and force developers to change a game as an outsider to an established fanbase.

Like, if you're never going to buy Dead Or Alive, why would you ever care what it features?

The Lunatic:
You shouldn't try and force developers to change a game as an outsider to an established fanbase.

How do you quantify what an outsider is, exactly? Merit points? Pounds/dollars/yen put into an IP over X amount of years?

Presumably critique and commentary is 'allowed' from anyone and everyone. So when does critique and commentary - or even just plain mockery or attacks, to widen the net of potential opinions expressed - become forcing anything?

And who really deserves any complaints or ire; the people offering critique and/or attack, or the devs and/or publisher who responds to it? Point being, there is rarely if ever anything being forced. Parties offering critique - or attacks - obviously have no power to wield upon a dev team, and governments 'forcing' changes upon games is usually related to ratings issues (and such issues and process differ wildly between regions).

Like, if you're never going to buy Dead Or Alive, why would you ever care what it features?

Because it's part of our culture and society, ergo everyone's free to care about whatever they wish?

Again, that's everyone's right, and people 'caring' doesn't magically bestow upon them project oversight.

The rightwing/alt-righers/'gaters often tended to bring up market forces as a point of justification against critique or commentary; 'sex sells!/it's only natural!'. Well, if market forces are okay when they're enabling one form of content, surely the winds changing and 'forcing' other changes in order to maintain commercial viability is the glory of capitalist markets functioning as intended? Trends and attitudes change, ergo content and how it's promoted changes.

Sure, some people or groups could stretch credulity with their critiques/commentaries/attacks. But don't blame them for either weak willed devs or publishers feeling the need to make changes. And if they need to make changes to maintain commercial viability, well, see above... 'The system' is working as intended. You can't say 'sex sells' and then object when it becomes 'sex doesn't sell as well as it used to'.

Smithnikov:

Any thoughts?

image

The reason of why the right wing has no problem with Riot: Civil Unrest is probably because it lacks bite. Its only political message is "riots happen".

Only game that came to mind as some sort of communist simulator was "Don't Starve".

As for making a game to piss off a group of people... why? You can just look at the "punch 'insert political personality here'" style games to see how worthwhile that sort of audience targeting is going to work. But I suppose if you are willing to invest only as much as a cheap flash game, you might make returns out of the inevitable controversy it causes, be it from those opposed to it, or those who claim it is "brave" to challenge all those anti-communists.

runic knight:
Only game that came to mind as some sort of communist simulator was "Don't Starve".

As for making a game to piss off a group of people... why? You can just look at the "punch 'insert political personality here'" style games to see how worthwhile that sort of audience targeting is going to work. But I suppose if you are willing to invest only as much as a cheap flash game, you might make returns out of the inevitable controversy it causes, be it from those opposed to it, or those who claim it is "brave" to challenge all those anti-communists.

Or Crisis in the Kremlin if you're enough of a grognard...

Darth Rosenberg:
Snip

I freelanced within the industry for a couple years.

There's significant pressure in order to appease people that simply don't exist.

The few I worked on, basically had guidelines which amounted to "Don't do anything that would get us a Kotaku article". Was it likely that anyone who views Kotaku was going to buy a random steam early access game about robots? No. Was it likely the investors would pull if they got that kinda bad press? Yes.

That's not "Market forces" that's a chilling effect.

I was fortunate enough to just be some random guy making 3D models for money whilst I looked for a proper place. The actual people making and designing characters have it so much worse. The entire idea that a project's success can live or die on the bust size of a female character is absurd. And at no point at the people who actually have interest in the game involved, it's entirely just people who have no intention of buying the game anyway.

The reality is, despite socialist fantasies, people need money to live. And if a person has to choose between having a job and creative freedom, it doesn't take a genius to work out which they're going to choose.

Now, I'm not going to say that Generic Robot shooter #152 would have done better had we featured girls with giant breasts, we've no evidence of that. (Mostly because it didn't even do very well to begin with, and most people got sick of the project and moved on.), but, I can say that even the idea would never had gotten anywhere, and not because "People wouldn't buy it", but, because we'd be out of a job for even thinking about it.

I fail to see any way in which stifling creativity is a "Good idea". Much in the same way, stifling creativity about making a game about communism, or some other notion doesn't improve the overall gaming scene.

The Lunatic:
The entire idea that a project's success can live or die on the bust size of a female character is absurd. And at no point at the people who actually have interest in the game involved, it's entirely just people who have no intention of buying the game anyway.

The irony of this generalization is that I've heard so many great things about NieR: Automata and it seems like it has gameplay, story and themes that I could really enjoy. But I honestly can't push myself to play a game that so blatantly designed the main character for male gaze fanservice.

My point being that not everyone who complains about poor design choices in terms of female gendered characters are outsider who complain just for the sake of it. Some of us are genuinely put off good games because of what we feel are very poor design choices.

The Lunatic:
The few I worked on, basically had guidelines which amounted to "Don't do anything that would get us a Kotaku article". Was it likely that anyone who views Kotaku was going to buy a random steam early access game about robots? No. Was it likely the investors would pull if they got that kinda bad press? Yes.

That's not "Market forces" that's a chilling effect.

You ignored my points about changing attitudes. How is a company shaping their product to suit a given market not market forces? Attitudes - even nebulous perceptions of them - in a given market shape business decisions. And so what some may want to see as moral censure is just business, hence my challenge to the right; if 'sex sells' is a smug, apolitical explanation for why something sells, isn't 'sex doesn't sell as much any more' just as apolitically valid? What's changed are the values defining that outcome.

Aside from that, I'd be interested in seeing exactly what your superiors guidelines were. "Amounted to" doesn't provide enough detail to comment further. Could be that your superiors were just gutless idiots - if so, blame them [for making a certain business decision to make their product more viable]. Would you be able to share some art or captures of assets, be it in this thread or via PM's? The guidelines could've perhaps made a lot of sense, or the content could've been wholly innocuous (no one can comment without some key examples).

I was fortunate enough to just be some random guy making 3D models for money whilst I looked for a proper place. The actual people making and designing characters have it so much worse. The entire idea that a project's success can live or die on the bust size of a female character is absurd.

Why? As above, values change, and regions differ in tastes and trends. It's perfectly natural for certain design elements to suit one market or the other more or less.

To be surprised that the aesthetic choices of a game have an impact on its viability is--- well, peculiar.

The reality is, despite socialist fantasies, people need money to live. And if a person has to choose between having a job and creative freedom, it doesn't take a genius to work out which they're going to choose.

Which is something everyone of any political stripe has to deal with, especially if they're in a creative medium. Art is almost never 'pure', and is compromised in so many ways throughout development.

Films and games in particular, given their potential budgets, are by their nature huge business enterprises as well as creative ones.

I fail to see any way in which stifling creativity is a "Good idea". Much in the same way, stifling creativity about making a game about communism, or some other notion doesn't improve the overall gaming scene.

It's a cheap shot from me, I know, but it's amusing you include 'I want big tits in games' as part of "creativity". ; -) That's about as inherently creatively bankrupt as it's possible to get, surely, to appeal to teenage boy's and young men's fantasies.

Btw, I'm certainly not advocating against games like DoA or, what was it, Dragon's Crown from being made and released (on a personal note I enjoy some forms of heteronormative objectification, and aside from that, culture frankly needs more genuine expressive sexuality and sexualisation, which are distinct from mere objectification). Regardless of my own personal preferences and politics, I obviously feel people should be free to make whatever they wish. But the freedom to make something doesn't magically bestow upon the creator the gift of them or their creation being accepted, tolerated, or embraced by the market (economic and cultural).

Gethsemani:
The irony of this generalization is that I've heard so many great things about NieR: Automata and it seems like it has gameplay, story and themes that I could really enjoy. But I honestly can't push myself to play a game that so blatantly designed the main character for male gaze fanservice.

My point being that not everyone who complains about poor design choices in terms of female gendered characters are outsider who complain just for the sake of it. Some of us are genuinely put off good games because of what we feel are very poor design choices.

Nier Automata's a tricky one for me. Well, perhaps not, perhaps 'it's Japanese' broadly suffices. I'm not a fan of Japanese game design (or anime) in general, and so when they emphasise fanservice-y nonsense I'm almost always doubly put off.

Playing it or not is completely academic as I only game on Xbox. I don't think its style would be enough to put me off playing it, however, because I can at least respect that it has a defined creative aesthetic. I don't like the look of its combat/core gameplay, either, but I certainly would like to see whether its story, structure, and themes deserve the praise I've heard. A lot of people suggest it's some kind of medium deconstructing existential masterpiece, but I've heard some dismiss it as poorly written and simplistically pretentious guff. I'd like to find out if I fall into one or t'other camp, or somewhere in between.

Gethsemani:

The irony of this generalization is that I've heard so many great things about NieR: Automata and it seems like it has gameplay, story and themes that I could really enjoy. But I honestly can't push myself to play a game that so blatantly designed the main character for male gaze fanservice.

My point being that not everyone who complains about poor design choices in terms of female gendered characters are outsider who complain just for the sake of it. Some of us are genuinely put off good games because of what we feel are very poor design choices.

i thought I was the only one! For all the praise heaped upon Near a tomato, the character design/s deflate any and all sense of enthusiasm I could have for the game. It doesn't help that there's the noticable trend of weebs declaring 2B (I think is the name, sounds like a pencil) their waifu of the decade or whatever, which sends all kinds of negative inner-responses off. It feels like it should be trivial and easily ignored, but it's there nonetheless, can't exactly fool myself into being excited

Gethsemani:

The irony of this generalization is that I've heard so many great things about NieR: Automata and it seems like it has gameplay, story and themes that I could really enjoy. But I honestly can't push myself to play a game that so blatantly designed the main character for male gaze fanservice.

I feel that way about things blatantly designed for "social justice" gaze fanservice.

Gethsemani:
Snip

Okay, but, why should anyone care about your sensibilities?

The developer wants the character to look that way, so, that's how it should be. Video games are art. Artists shouldn't be bound by overactive sensibilities.

Added to that, you're asking the impossible. Why should the developers listen to you over anyone else? If the developers were to have 2B in a burqa the entire game, sure, it's no longer "Male Gaze" or whatever you call it, but, it's deeply off-putting towards people who do care about women's rights.

There's no net-gain to be had, and instead there some to be some expectation that developers find a magical middle ground, rather than just making what they want to make.

Added to that, there's plenty of people who enjoy 2B as she is. Why should the enjoyment of these people be thrown away by your inability to tolerate such things?

Darth Rosenberg:
You ignored my points about changing attitudes.

It doesn't exist. Games that go heavy on the social justice don't sell as well. You can decry Dead or Alive as much as you want. It still outsells wolfenstein.

Darth Rosenberg:
How is a company shaping their product to suit a given market not market forces? Attitudes - even nebulous perceptions of them - in a given market shape business decisions. And so what some may want to see as moral censure is just business, hence my challenge to the right; if 'sex sells' is a smug, apolitical explanation for why something sells, isn't 'sex doesn't sell as much any more' just as apolitically valid? What's changed are the values defining that outcome.

Because there's no proof of the idea that sex no longer sells as well. But there is proof that these more socially conscious games sell very poorly.

Instead it's just artists being hamstrung by a small group of people who get overly upset about these things.

Darth Rosenberg:
Aside from that, I'd be interested in seeing exactly what your superiors guidelines were. "Amounted to" doesn't provide enough detail to comment further. Could be that your superiors were just gutless idiots - if so, blame them [for making a certain business decision to make their product more viable]. Would you be able to share some art or captures of assets, be it in this thread or via PM's? The guidelines could've perhaps made a lot of sense, or the content could've been wholly innocuous (no one can comment without some key examples).

I figured this would come up. And... Not really. I can't post any work I've worked on, as it'd lead people to be able to find out who I am.

I can't link any of my portfolio work, because then people could reverse image search it, and find my web page, and who I am.

On this website, I've received death threats and so on, even as far as having my own personal email leaked.

So, I'll not take the chance. Sorry.

This may also go some degree to explain my disdained for these overly active social justice-y types.

Why? As above, values change, and regions differ in tastes and trends. It's perfectly natural for certain design elements to suit one market or the other more or less.

To be surprised that the aesthetic choices of a game have an impact on its viability is--- well, peculiar.

I'm surprised that a trend which has no evidence of existence is so prevalence, yes.

I mean, trashy VNs sell more than even some of the most heavily promoted socially conscious VNs.

Compared for example, the extremely well-promoted and socially conscious Dating simulator "Dream Daddy",a homosexual-oriented game featuring a man of every colour, build, a trans character and so on.

According to steamspy: 250,206 owners at $15 a pop.

Then on the other had, we have Sakura Spirit, a game which has giant breasted anime girls, a very poor english translation, lower userscore and is apparently quite short and not a single article I can find promoting it.

According to steamspy: 473,349 at $10 a pop.

The problem is, is that good games don't get a chance to happen because some says "Oh, no, you can't do that any more" Despite there being no evidence that these games don't sell as well.

Which is something everyone of any political stripe has to deal with, especially if they're in a creative medium. Art is almost never 'pure', and is compromised in so many ways throughout development.

Films and games in particular, given their potential budgets, are by their nature huge business enterprises as well as creative ones.

That's not a good thing. Adding more obstructionism isn't a good thing. Driving artists out of the industry by demanding they don't do what they enjoy, or making it impossible for games people want to buy to be made in the first place is not an improvement.

It's a cheap shot from me, I know, but it's amusing you include 'I want big tits in games' as part of "creativity". ; -) That's about as inherently creatively bankrupt as it's possible to get, surely, to appeal to teenage boy's and young men's fantasies.

Okay, well, that's your opinion.

What gives it value? And who are you to call the work of artists "Bankrupt"?

Honestly, this just strikes that you don't value the artists working in this industry at all.

I obviously feel people should be free to make whatever they wish. But the freedom to make something doesn't magically bestow upon the creator the gift of them or their creation being accepted, tolerated, or embraced by the market (economic and cultural).

Then I'm sure you'll work to dispel this belief that there isn't enough room in the industry for the socially concerned types and everyone else?

The Lunatic:

Gethsemani:
Snip

Okay, but, why should anyone care about your sensibilities?

You missed my point with more than a mile. Your point was that the people who complain about "bust size" are just outsiders who wouldn't buy the game anyway. Mine and Xsjadoblade's posts are simply to point out that that is not true. I am not asking that they care about my sensibilities, I am pointing out that they lost a sale because of their design choices.

Gethsemani:

The Lunatic:

Gethsemani:
Snip

Okay, but, why should anyone care about your sensibilities?

You missed my point with more than a mile. Your point was that the people who complain about "bust size" are just outsiders who wouldn't buy the game anyway. Mine and Xsjadoblade's posts are simply to point out that that is not true. I am not asking that they care about my sensibilities, I am pointing out that they lost a sale because of their design choices.

So what? You can literally say that about every design choice they've made...

inmunitas:

So what? You can literally say that about every design choice they've made...

Yup, which is a point I've been making on this forum for years; that I don't consider the decision to sexualize characters or provide fanservice to be a unique kind of aesthetic design decision. It is just another design decision like any other and as such it is entirely appropriate to critique it as such.

The Lunatic is using the old argument of "artists right to create whatever they want" (which is true) but adds the claim that anyone who doesn't want what the artist makes is an outsider that wouldn't be interested anyway, even if different aesthetic choices were made. My point is that that's not true (see me and Xsjado) and that the artist can make whatever they want, but if they make aesthetic choices people disagree with that might put people off of their game.

This is not about changing NieR or being a snowflake or any of those things that I already know will be instant counter-arguments. This is about the fact that the bust size of the character is just as important an aesthetic decision as any other. That the Lunatic doesn't think it is an important choice does not change the fact that for some of us it is, just like I don't particular care if my shooters are third of first person, despite that being a deal breaker for many people.

Which is all a long winded way of saying that no one has any right to tell anyone else what aesthetic choices should be considered important or deal breakers. If you don't agree, that's fine. But it is all subjective in the end and the artist, if they want to be commercially viable, must absolutely consider whether their particular style and decisions are actually marketable to a wider audience. Doesn't matter if the choice is Retro Pixel graphics or whether to dress your killer android in an elaborate minidress.

Gethsemani:
You missed my point with more than a mile. Your point was that the people who complain about "bust size" are just outsiders who wouldn't buy the game anyway. Mine and Xsjadoblade's posts are simply to point out that that is not true. I am not asking that they care about my sensibilities, I am pointing out that they lost a sale because of their design choices.

Well, do you have a history of buying Nier games, or Platinum games in general?

If you don't, then, yeah, it's fair to say you're an outsider to the series, and not really the intended market, so, nobody has much reason to listen to you.

Added to that, you even admitted you didn't even buy the game. So, like, if something as puritanical as "The woman's skirt is too short" is a reason to not even give the game a shot, maybe they're wasting their time as likely if that's your "No" zone, you'd find plenty of other objectionable things from playing it.

The point you seem to be making is "I have a right to complain, even if my complaints aren't important and nobody who actually follows this series or buys these games would want the complaints I'm making", which... I mean that just seems like pointless whining. You'll forgive me if I don't see the value in that.

The Lunatic:
Well, do you have a history of buying Nier games, or Platinum games in general?

Yes. Between MGS: Revengeance, The Legend of Korra and Bayonetta 1/2 (neither of which I bought admittedly, related to the same reason I didn't buy NieR) I do think I've bought, played and enjoyed a fair few of their games.

The Lunatic:
If you don't, then, yeah, it's fair to say you're an outsider to the series, and not really the intended market, so, nobody has much reason to listen to you.

Nobody has a reason to listen to me anyway, unless they like what I say or the sound of my voice. I was just pointing our your logical fallacy that anyone who complained about the sexualization in a game wouldn't be buying it if the sexualization wasn't there. This is about your weak argument, not me.

The Lunatic:
Added to that, you even admitted you didn't even buy the game. So, like, if something as puritanical as "The woman's skirt is too short" is a reason to not even give the game a shot, maybe they're wasting their time as likely if that's your "No" zone, you'd find plenty of other objectionable things from playing it.

Granted, me and Platinum have a mixed history as I like their gameplay but NieR and Bayonetta are also games that I like to hold up as needlessly male gaze fanservicing. Which, once again, is the entire point as you said that complainers wouldn't be buying these games. Which I very much would if the killer android wasn't dressed like a stripper.

The Lunatic:
The point you seem to be making is "I have a right to complain, even if my complaints aren't important and nobody who actually follows this series or buys these games would want the complaints I'm making", which... I mean that just seems like pointless whining. You'll forgive me if I don't see the value in that.

Once again you are very much of the mark. Try again.

Gethsemani:

inmunitas:

So what? You can literally say that about every design choice they've made...

Yup, which is a point I've been making on this forum for years; that I don't consider the decision to sexualize characters or provide fanservice to be a unique kind of aesthetic design decision. It is just another design decision like any other and as such it is entirely appropriate to critique it as such.

Well no, it would be appropriate if such critique was valid.

...
if they want to be commercially viable, must absolutely consider whether their particular style and decisions are actually marketable to a wider audience. Doesn't matter if the choice is Retro Pixel graphics or whether to dress your killer android in an elaborate minidress.

You seem to be implying that they don't do this already. I would assume the analytics they have show the bust size of a character (or whatever) to be of little consequence to the profits they can expect.

inmunitas:

You seem to be implying that they don't do this already. I would assume the analytics they have show the bust size of a character (or whatever) to be of little consequence to the profits they can expect.

I don't, the Lunatic does. It was he who started this entire argument when he wrote: "The entire idea that a project's success can live or die on the bust size of a female character is absurd.". Your beef is with his argument, not with mine.

Gethsemani:

inmunitas:

You seem to be implying that they don't do this already. I would assume the analytics they have show the bust size of a character (or whatever) to be of little consequence to the profits they can expect.

I don't, the Lunatic does. It was he who started this entire argument when he wrote: "The entire idea that a project's success can live or die on the bust size of a female character is absurd.". Your beef is with his argument, not with mine.

I believe Lunatic's "argument" is with regards to media coverage and certain games being unfairly critiqued or something, and that like being totally uncool when the critique isn't valid anyway. However rather then just saying that they're like spouting all this other silly nonsense and stuff.

Gethsemani:
Yes. Between MGS: Revengeance, The Legend of Korra and Bayonetta 1/2 (neither of which I bought admittedly, related to the same reason I didn't buy NieR) I do think I've bought, played and enjoyed a fair few of their games.

So, you played it and enjoyed the games, but, you didn't pay for two of them.

I take it you don't have much respect for these people, do you?

Added to that, you're willing to pay and play MGS Revengence, a game that features Mistrel, a sexed-up French android who is basically constantly stroking something whilst the camera focuses on her breasts.

It seems a little inconsistent that you'd state you enjoyed that game, and pay for it, and then complain about Nier, which in comparison is much more innocent.

That would appear to be a very inconsistent set of beliefs.

Gethsemani:

Nobody has a reason to listen to me anyway, unless they like what I say or the sound of my voice. I was just pointing our your logical fallacy that anyone who complained about the sexualization in a game wouldn't be buying it if the sexualization wasn't there. This is about your weak argument, not me.

Well so far, your argument has amounted to: I won't buy games with sexualisation in them, unless they're metal gear rising, in which case I will. Nor will I enjoy them, unless they're Bayonetta.

Which, you'll forgive me seems that your complaints of sexualisation don't actually factor into if you'll buy a game.

Like, what message exactly are you trying to convey here?

"Don't be as sexualised as Nier, which is less sexualised than the games I actually like and buy?"

Gethsemani:

Granted, me and Platinum have a mixed history as I like their gameplay but NieR and Bayonetta are also games that I like to hold up as needlessly male gaze fanservicing. Which, once again, is the entire point as you said that complainers wouldn't be buying these games. Which I very much would if the killer android wasn't dressed like a stripper.

But you will if the main character is a witch-woman in a skin-tight suit (Or no clothes at all.), constantly shows off her chest, or if the game features a character who speaks in a sultry french accent and has a camera fixed to her boobs at all times?

🤔

The Lunatic:

So, you played it and enjoyed the games, but, you didn't pay for two of them.

I take it you don't have much respect for these people, do you?

Added to that, you're willing to pay and play MGS Revengence, a game that features Mistrel, a sexed-up French android who is basically constantly stroking something whilst the camera focuses on her breasts.

It seems a little inconsistent that you'd state you enjoyed that game, and pay for it, and then complain about Nier, which in comparison is much more innocent.

That would appear to be a very inconsistent set of beliefs.

This would appear to be nothing but an ad hominem with no relevance to the actual argument made.

The Lunatic:
Well so far, your argument has amounted to: I won't buy games with sexualisation in them, unless they're metal gear rising, in which case I will. Nor will I enjoy them, unless they're Bayonetta.

Which, you'll forgive me seems that your complaints of sexualisation don't actually factor into if you'll buy a game.

Like, what message exactly are you trying to convey here?

"Don't be as sexualised as Nier, which is less sexualised than the games I actually like and buy?"

You'll forgive me if I don't engage with this very elaborate strawman, it is much to nice to be sullied by mere mortal hands.

The Lunatic:
But you will if the main character is a witch-woman in a skin-tight suit (Or no clothes at all.), constantly shows off her chest, or if the game features a character who speaks in a sultry french accent and has a camera fixed to her boobs at all times?

🤔

But let's get serious: Address my damn argument and stop making ad hominem attacks. I've engaged your argument in good faith, but your entire reply series to me so far has been nothing but you attempting to undermine my credibility, by making strawmen and ad hominems. So step up or stop posting.

Gethsemani:
Snip

You are the subject of your own argument.

You argue that people don't make these complaints without reason, and that these things do affect their desire to purchase games.

You then go on to use your own experience with Nier as an example of a person which validates this argument.

Any criticism of this person is valid as criticism of the argument itself.

This got a laugh out of me, because you don't even need a communist game to get under certain people's skin.

It's like 3 years since "Read Only Memories" got released, and there are still occaisional troll reviews, whiny commenters, etc who show up in the steam groups going "wah, game make no sense why so many gay/trans/"they" users/ etc in this game not realistic meeeehhhhh, also why is halal and kosher and vegetarian in the game as diet choices, meeeeehhhh" or hilariously accusing it of being propaganda because "If you don't treat everyone like the specialist snowflake ever u no get good ending!!!" or otherwise making a fuss that "know SJWs Jim Sterling and Literally Who are voice actors in teh gaem!!"

And this is over a small retro looking cyberpunk adventure game made by a diverse LGBT filed studio that said "why don't we make a really diverse cyberpunk game?" and it turned out to be pretty great (Minus ONE time you're forced to make a social goof-up with a particular character who takes the whole game to let it go).

Honestly, anything could trigger those kinds of people, well, at least the regular level ones. The "Big names" of those kinds of people, however, only come out for REALLY big stuff, and I doubt an indie communist themed game will. Did any of them kick up a fuss about Wolfenstein 2, out of curiosity?

The Lunatic:
The developer wants the character to look that way, so, that's how it should be. Video games are art. Artists shouldn't be bound by overactive sensibilities.

Oh jeese... "Video games are art" is an incredibly naive (bordering on delusional), reductively incorrect statement.

Videogames - like any other medium - service a wide range of functions. They are not one thing, they are many. On one end of the spectrum is mass market product, and on t'other there's what could be pointlessly described as purer art (often by its very nature obscure stuff barely anyone notices and has little impact). Compromise in various forms tends to shape all creative art in some form, but obviously the closer you get to sheer mass market commodity the greater the level of compromise required.

Neither end of the spectrum is inherently good/bad or preferable/not preferable. The beauty of all mediums (of human nature itself given that's what's being expressed in all art) is its diversity and range. And yes, for me that ultimately includes those wanting to peddle leery, exploitative, lazy fanservicey if they wish. However, attitudes and values change; things like racism and homophobia are, by and large, far less tolerated these days than in decades past. And so actual sexism/misogyny is hopefully assured a similar fate.

...and no, the 'death of sexism' has no bearing on sexualised content or sexual expression (hell, we need more sex in films and games, just done well and in context. the normalisation of commodified pop-violence relative to the controversies nudity and sex tend to provoke is profoundly disturbing. I think we're seeing improvements, though, i.e. less eyebrows arching over nudity or sex, and more explicit content being used dramatically). Contrary to certain folk's fantastically paranoid outlooks, an opposition to sexism/misogyny is not equivalent to some wacky inverse puritanism.

It doesn't exist.

Right, the trend doesn't exist at all even though, apparently, your overlords saw fit to make you conform to it? Aren't you degrading your own argument?

Look around right now and you'll a lot of discussion, and soul searching, about sexism, representation, and so on. Some of it histrionic, much of it sincere and productive.

If videogames want to play with the boy boys/girls (e.g. literature, cinema), then they open themselves up to a far broader scope of critique and commentary from an increasingly diverse set of people. As gamergate and wotnot demonstrated, the gaming community's not best equipped for mature discussion, where so many (typically young, insecure males) over identify with the things they consume, i.e. immaturely seeing critique of the things they enjoy with a personal attack.

We need to move past that and develop the conversation, but at this point certain folk are so entrenched with their emotive dogma (both 'sides') that that's proving difficult.

Games that go heavy on the social justice don't sell as well. You can decry Dead or Alive as much as you want. It still outsells wolfenstein.

Erm, eh? Which Wolfenstein? I only played TNO, and that had nothing that any sensible human being would highlight as being about 'social justice', whatever that actually means.

I gather the sequel was a misfire, but ostensibly for its dreary map design and over-indulgence in cutscenes, hence why I've thus far given it the swerve despite loving the original. Some alt-righters got triggered by some of the marketing, I understand, but they'd need to ponder why 'Nazism/fascism bad' gets under their skin so much.

Because there's no proof of the idea that sex no longer sells as well. But there is proof that these more socially conscious games sell very poorly.

Is there a trend to deconstruct character design and tone more than there used to be? Yes. As a supposed 'artist' you should surely embrace that whole heartedly. As I touched upon above, this medium is still very young and it has not had the same degree of analysis and critique applied to it as the other established mediums, the ones not so easily dismissed as toys.

Can you list some "socially conscious" games, btw? Preferably ones that aren't pointlessly niche?

I also never stated anything about explicitly "socially conscious games" (partly because I don't know what those are, and I have a feeling your definition is peculiarly particular whilst being incredibly nebulous) selling well, just that what constitutes a status quo with no introspection has, happily, dissolved, and there is a greater culture of analysis and deconstruction.

Values do shift across cultural divides, and if, for example, exploitative Japanese designs no longer get a free pass in this neck of the woods, then I see that as only a natural side-effect of the different cultures coming into contact. There is a tension which naturally inspires debate and disagreement.

I figured this would come up. And... Not really. I can't post any work I've worked on, as it'd lead people to be able to find out who I am.

I can't link any of my portfolio work, because then people could reverse image search it, and find my web page, and who I am.

Well, you'll forgive me for not taking what you claim as read, then, if you're not willing to elaborate or provide examples.

And you ignored my point about your bosses - if what you're trying to claim is true occurred - and where the blame should lie; if your company didn't have the guts to stick to its aesthetic guns (as potentially unimaginative and lazy as they rather sound going from your few references), decry them, not anyone offering critique, analysis, commentary, or even attack.

I mean, trashy VNs sell more than even some of the most heavily promoted socially conscious VNs.

Compared for example, the extremely well-promoted and socially conscious Dating simulator "Dream Daddy",a homosexual-oriented game featuring a man of every colour, build, a trans character and so on.

According to steamspy: 250,206 owners at $15 a pop.

Then on the other had, we have Sakura Spirit, a game which has giant breasted anime girls, a very poor english translation, lower userscore and is apparently quite short and not a single article I can find promoting it.

According to steamspy: 473,349 at $10 a pop.

The problem is, is that good games don't get a chance to happen because some says "Oh, no, you can't do that any more" Despite there being no evidence that these games don't sell as well.

I loathe VN's of any sort, so this really isn't my turf.

I'm not familiar with either 'game' or even using Steam, but as far as I can tell Sakura Angels was released in 2015, and Dream Daddy in 2017. Regardless of relative popularity, it's a poor example to use, and more data's needed to make it at all speculatively worthwhile, i.e. Sakura is much cheaper as well as being on the market longer, how important is that, and how long have the prices been so different? And so on.

On top of that it seems a very poor example in general, i.e. VN's have been a predominantly, and traditionally, Japanese/Asian thing, right? Whilst I know female gamers are pandered to in their own ways as well, the IP's that always seem to get any real attention in in the West are those that seem to reflect the tired cliches, e.g. IP's for boys/men with a penchant for panty flashing and bizarrely big tits.

Why would anyone expect a game that largely contradicts that culture to do better (especially if it's been on the market for less time, and may've been more expensive)? Sakura Angels is also sequel, no less, and as far as I can tell Dream Daddy is a new IP.

Again, I couldn't care less about such design, and I'd defend the right for 'artists' to be as creatively bankrupt as they wish and go all in for objectification and Japanese schoolgirl fetishism. It should be their right to create, and it is everyone else's right to react to it how they wish. If a company doesn't have the courage of its own convictions, it's no great loss if it compromises or goes out of business. 'And nothing of value was lost'.

'SJW's' decry X, anti-SJW's decry Y. The world keeps turning, and most normal people just keep on gaming.

That's not a good thing. Adding more obstructionism isn't a good thing. Driving artists out of the industry by demanding they don't do what they enjoy, or making it impossible for games people want to buy to be made in the first place is not an improvement.

Well, tough. 'Deal with it'. Neither life nor the commercial market is supposed to be fair. Art being compromised is as old as art itself, and as budgets go up, compromises in various forms become essential to guarantee viability/investment. No art is ever truly created in a vacuum, either.

Sometimes compromises can be positive, too. In film, Blade Runner 2049 could've perhaps benefited from a slightly trimmed runtime. Was it too indulgent? Did the artist override sensible concerns re the length or tone of the film relative to the market's tastes? Jared Leto's shitty acting aside, I adored it, so I'm grateful Denis was so self-indulgent and the studio allowed him to take risks. But it rather seems a poor business decision.

Apropos sexualised or objectifying content specifically, do you concede sometimes it flat out doesn't make sense or work contextually? The infamous ass shots of Miranda Lawson in Mass Effect 2 were bizarre given the content of the dialogue.

Or, as Lindsay Ellis demonstrates, Bay's leering of Mikaela Banes in the Transformer films. Desexualise key scenes and shots, and not only do you axe the 'problematic' content, but you cohere the actual script (Mikaela's got more brains, agency, and an arc than the pathetic male lead) with its filming style. There's a time and a place for sexualised content, and so there must be reasoned critique when it's seen to be used poorly.

Okay, well, that's your opinion.

What gives it value? And who are you to call the work of artists "Bankrupt"?

I give my own commentary value, as a lifelong gamer and someone interested in art and culture/society. My commentary doesn't have any inherent effect, though, so it's a moot point. Mine is only one voice amidst countless others.

And I can call the work of artists creatively bankrupt because, quite frankly, lots of artists are. Creative bankruptcy can result from commercial meddling or simply pandering to tired tropes.

Honestly, this just strikes that you don't value the artists working in this industry at all.

Again, 'and nothing of value was lost' if the industry loses people who choose to die on cultural hills made up of double-D's and ill-fitting bikini armour.

Appealing to straight male lust [in a society that sees it as the default] is an easy, often lazy way to make entertainment, so if that's so important to you - y'know, as an artiste! *flourishes beret* - then I think you can rest assured that it won't be dying off any time soon. Or ever, probably.

Then I'm sure you'll work to dispel this belief that there isn't enough room in the industry for the socially concerned types and everyone else?

Nope, if the pro-status quo anti-SJW's are free to screech about BioWare having the temerity to not design characters for 'them' and 'their' games (as they attempt to claim cultural ownership over everyone's medium), then the 'SJW's' can go nuts on whatever nonsense they wish. They tend to cancel each other out, or just fester in their own echo chamber playpens.

What I care about is the informed critique, and discussion, in between the two.

Like I said, I can definitely sometimes enjoy objectification and the male gaze, but there's a contextual and tonal time and place for skimp, for example, and so often gaming's got it skewed given it's generally just been men making games for men (or, rather, their own egoistic inner-boy who refuses to mature).

aegix drakan:
Did any of them kick up a fuss about Wolfenstein 2, out of curiosity?

Yupppp.

Smithnikov:

aegix drakan:
Did any of them kick up a fuss about Wolfenstein 2, out of curiosity?

Yupppp.

Oooh, really? :o Some of the big alt-right asshats kicked up a stink about it?! ...I think I need to go google some articles, because that's got to be delicious. Who the hell would get offended at a fictional game about shooting nazis?

aegix drakan:
"If you don't treat everyone like the specialist snowflake ever u no get good ending!!!"

Jeez! I feel bad for every store clerk who may meet these guys...

aegix drakan:

Smithnikov:

aegix drakan:
Did any of them kick up a fuss about Wolfenstein 2, out of curiosity?

Yupppp.

Oooh, really? :o Some of the big alt-right asshats kicked up a stink about it?! ...I think I need to go google some articles, because that's got to be delicious. Who the hell would get offended at a fictional game about shooting nazis?

GamerGate.

Smithnikov:

aegix drakan:

Smithnikov:

Yupppp.

Oooh, really? :o Some of the big alt-right asshats kicked up a stink about it?! ...I think I need to go google some articles, because that's got to be delicious. Who the hell would get offended at a fictional game about shooting nazis?

GamerGate.

I looked up some articles and was kinda disappointed. I thought you said some big alt-right names flipped their shit (spencer/bannon level big names), all I saw was the usual youtube comment manbabies who whine and cry about everything anyway. :(

aegix drakan:

Smithnikov:

aegix drakan:

Oooh, really? :o Some of the big alt-right asshats kicked up a stink about it?! ...I think I need to go google some articles, because that's got to be delicious. Who the hell would get offended at a fictional game about shooting nazis?

GamerGate.

I looked up some articles and was kinda disappointed. I thought you said some big alt-right names flipped their shit (spencer/bannon level big names), all I saw was the usual youtube comment manbabies who whine and cry about everything anyway. :(

And that's good. It would be sad (and a little scary) if big names flipped their shit about videogames being unfair to Nazis.

aegix drakan:

Smithnikov:

aegix drakan:

Oooh, really? :o Some of the big alt-right asshats kicked up a stink about it?! ...I think I need to go google some articles, because that's got to be delicious. Who the hell would get offended at a fictional game about shooting nazis?

GamerGate.

I looked up some articles and was kinda disappointed. I thought you said some big alt-right names flipped their shit (spencer/bannon level big names), all I saw was the usual youtube comment manbabies who whine and cry about everything anyway. :(

Wellp, I figured if some colored hair college age SJW nitwits with a tumblr indicates a massive tide of censorship, then...

Smithnikov:

aegix drakan:

Smithnikov:

GamerGate.

I looked up some articles and was kinda disappointed. I thought you said some big alt-right names flipped their shit (spencer/bannon level big names), all I saw was the usual youtube comment manbabies who whine and cry about everything anyway. :(

Wellp, I figured if some colored hair college age SJW nitwits with a tumblr indicates a massive tide of censorship, then...

Your comparison would probably hold more water if that "colored hair college age SJW nitwits with a tumblr" wasn't often also a writer for a media publication, or some media personality promoted and shielded from criticism by the clique there. Just because you don't like gamergate doesn't mean everyone who says something you dislike is part of it. You've been caught and called out for outright lying about such things before, I would have thought you'd be more restrained in your baseless claims as a result.

runic knight:

Smithnikov:

aegix drakan:

I looked up some articles and was kinda disappointed. I thought you said some big alt-right names flipped their shit (spencer/bannon level big names), all I saw was the usual youtube comment manbabies who whine and cry about everything anyway. :(

Wellp, I figured if some colored hair college age SJW nitwits with a tumblr indicates a massive tide of censorship, then...

Your comparison would probably hold more water if that "colored hair college age SJW nitwits with a tumblr" wasn't often also a writer for a media publication, or some media personality promoted and shielded from criticism by the clique there. Just because you don't like gamergate doesn't mean everyone who says something you dislike is part of it. You've been caught and called out for outright lying about such things before, I would have thought you'd be more restrained in your baseless claims as a result.

And just because the right wing doesn't like SJW's and cuckolds doesn't mean anything who says something they don't like is a cuckold and an SJW.

That hasn't stopped them from branding me with that right on my butt, though.

So what's it going to be?

The Lunatic:

Darth Rosenberg:
Snip

I freelanced within the industry for a couple years.

There's significant pressure in order to appease people that simply don't exist.

The few I worked on, basically had guidelines which amounted to "Don't do anything that would get us a Kotaku article". Was it likely that anyone who views Kotaku was going to buy a random steam early access game about robots? No. Was it likely the investors would pull if they got that kinda bad press? Yes.

That's not "Market forces" that's a chilling effect.

I was fortunate enough to just be some random guy making 3D models for money whilst I looked for a proper place. The actual people making and designing characters have it so much worse. The entire idea that a project's success can live or die on the bust size of a female character is absurd. And at no point at the people who actually have interest in the game involved, it's entirely just people who have no intention of buying the game anyway.

The reality is, despite socialist fantasies, people need money to live. And if a person has to choose between having a job and creative freedom, it doesn't take a genius to work out which they're going to choose.

Now, I'm not going to say that Generic Robot shooter #152 would have done better had we featured girls with giant breasts, we've no evidence of that. (Mostly because it didn't even do very well to begin with, and most people got sick of the project and moved on.), but, I can say that even the idea would never had gotten anywhere, and not because "People wouldn't buy it", but, because we'd be out of a job for even thinking about it.

I fail to see any way in which stifling creativity is a "Good idea". Much in the same way, stifling creativity about making a game about communism, or some other notion doesn't improve the overall gaming scene.

If thats the case we can applaud Kotaku for nearly killing Japanese Culture being exported overseas.

That said. If Takaki and all those B Devs can get away with it. Why aside from Wayforward there arent B Devs who smugly give a subtle middle finger to Kotaku?

gyrobot:

If thats the case we can applaud Kotaku for nearly killing Japanese Culture being exported overseas.

That said. If Takaki and all those B Devs can get away with it. Why aside from Wayforward there arent B Devs who smugly give a subtle middle finger to Kotaku?

Not everyone can afford it, sadly.

OT: Smithnikov, c'mere man, Gamergate is over, they can't hurt you anymore.
Just... come here, hug it out bro, hug it out, it's okay.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here