The biggest (or one of the biggest) video game magazines (that are still being physically printed) in Finland is Pelit. I have always had a rather positive attitude towards it because unlike so many other video game publications, it has for the most part stayed out of identity politics and attacking their own customers. In fact, in the reviews of some of the games that have been the subject of artificial identity politics controversy, the reviewer might have made an allusion to it, but without taking any sort of stance (and, in fact, in a couple of cases there may have even been a very subtle message that the whole controversy is ridiculous. Which, like always, has always been the case.)
But, like always, this cannot last. In their newest number they have a big opinion piece that's full-on SJW rhetoric, about "inclusivity", "diversity", "representation", "white heterosexual men", and how "diversity" in hiring is so important in the gaming industry. SIGH!
Why can't even one video game publication stay out of politics and not attack their own customers? What the f--k is wrong with them? Something like 99% of their customers are those exact "white heterosexual men", who are in this opinion piece accused of getting angry if there's "diversity" and "representation" in video games, and in the gaming industry.
The whole "representation" thing in video games is such a heap of bullshit. The SJW narrative, parroted in this opinion piece, is that gamers get angry and annoyed if they can't play with playable characters that represent themselves (ie. white heterosexual males), and thus detest if some game gives them no such choice and instead forces them to play with something else.
What the f--k is wrong with these people? That's so obviously incorrect it isn't even funny. They know this, yet they still pretend that it's not so.
Exactly how many gamers complain when, for example, a new Tomb Raider game is published? Or that the playable character in games like Portal or Alien: Isolation are women? Or that the playable character in The Walking Dead is a black man?
Nobody. There has never been any sort of controversy or backlash among gamers at large over these games. (If there had been, you can be damn sure the SJWs would have made a huge ruckus about it.) Gamers love these games. For example Tomb Raider has always been, since the first game in 1996 to this day, one of the most beloved game series in the world, and nobody has a problem with it. The SJWs know this perfectly well, yet they still pretend that gamers get all mad if there's a female protagonist in a video game, no matter how obviously and blatantly false that is.
Gamers care about the game being enjoyable and addictive to play, and for the characters in it, especially the playable character, to be likeable and relatable. Likeability and relatability has absolutely nothing to do with the skin color, gender, or even species, of the playable character. People do not empathize and relate only to people who look like them. We can feel empathy even for a dog or a mouse, especially if it's a sympathetic protagonist of a fictional story.
What gamers do not like is politics shoved down their throat. They do not like their beloved hobby to try to preach to them real-life identity politics. They do not like a game trying to tell them "you are a bad person if you don't like people with these characteristics, so now we will force you to play with one. You will like it, even if we have to force you to."
Gamers like sympathetic well-written characters. They do not like artificially-inserted identity politics that exist for the sake of propaganda and social engineering.
The problem in the modern world is that whenever a game has such a "diverse" and "inclusive" character, it automatically raises suspicions of why it was put there. Was it put there because it fits the story and the narrative, in other words, was it a natural storywriting process... or was it put there deliberately and artificially in order to send a message and try to influence the political views of people? 20 years ago almost nobody would have paid attention, but in the current world it automatically raises suspicions.
And that's assuming the character is otherwise well-written and sympathetic. In many cases they are not. When you artificially create certain types of characters to push an agenda, good storywriting tends to suffer.
As for "diversity" in hiring, when it comes to the video game industry, nobody cares what the sexual preferences of some random developer is, or what that developer might deep inside think of being. This is nothing but a conspiracy theory. Nobody is asking applicants "are you gay?" and discriminating against them if they answer yes. Nobody cares, not employees, not corporations, not gamers, what some random developer does in his private life and what goes inside his head. Companies care about qualifications and skill, and gamers care about how good the game is. They don't give a flying f--k about what they do in their private lives.
What the SJWs want is not "diversity" in video game companies. What they want is visible "diversity" there. They are not content with people just keeping their preferences and orientations to themselves, and just merely doing their jobs diligently and efficiently. What they want is for these people to be openly blatant about it, and show it, and virtue-signal about it. In other words, to be assholes about it. Nobody cares what they do in their private lives... and that's the problem! They should care! They should be shown it! The "diversity" should be shoved in their faces, and every aspect of the game development should be tainted by it!
The problem SJWs are having is not that game companies are not "diverse". The problem is that this "diversity" is not visible and blatant enough.
But, like always, this cannot last. In their newest number they have a big opinion piece that's full-on SJW rhetoric, about "inclusivity", "diversity", "representation", "white heterosexual men", and how "diversity" in hiring is so important in the gaming industry. SIGH!
Why can't even one video game publication stay out of politics and not attack their own customers? What the f--k is wrong with them? Something like 99% of their customers are those exact "white heterosexual men", who are in this opinion piece accused of getting angry if there's "diversity" and "representation" in video games, and in the gaming industry.
The whole "representation" thing in video games is such a heap of bullshit. The SJW narrative, parroted in this opinion piece, is that gamers get angry and annoyed if they can't play with playable characters that represent themselves (ie. white heterosexual males), and thus detest if some game gives them no such choice and instead forces them to play with something else.
What the f--k is wrong with these people? That's so obviously incorrect it isn't even funny. They know this, yet they still pretend that it's not so.
Exactly how many gamers complain when, for example, a new Tomb Raider game is published? Or that the playable character in games like Portal or Alien: Isolation are women? Or that the playable character in The Walking Dead is a black man?
Nobody. There has never been any sort of controversy or backlash among gamers at large over these games. (If there had been, you can be damn sure the SJWs would have made a huge ruckus about it.) Gamers love these games. For example Tomb Raider has always been, since the first game in 1996 to this day, one of the most beloved game series in the world, and nobody has a problem with it. The SJWs know this perfectly well, yet they still pretend that gamers get all mad if there's a female protagonist in a video game, no matter how obviously and blatantly false that is.
Gamers care about the game being enjoyable and addictive to play, and for the characters in it, especially the playable character, to be likeable and relatable. Likeability and relatability has absolutely nothing to do with the skin color, gender, or even species, of the playable character. People do not empathize and relate only to people who look like them. We can feel empathy even for a dog or a mouse, especially if it's a sympathetic protagonist of a fictional story.
What gamers do not like is politics shoved down their throat. They do not like their beloved hobby to try to preach to them real-life identity politics. They do not like a game trying to tell them "you are a bad person if you don't like people with these characteristics, so now we will force you to play with one. You will like it, even if we have to force you to."
Gamers like sympathetic well-written characters. They do not like artificially-inserted identity politics that exist for the sake of propaganda and social engineering.
The problem in the modern world is that whenever a game has such a "diverse" and "inclusive" character, it automatically raises suspicions of why it was put there. Was it put there because it fits the story and the narrative, in other words, was it a natural storywriting process... or was it put there deliberately and artificially in order to send a message and try to influence the political views of people? 20 years ago almost nobody would have paid attention, but in the current world it automatically raises suspicions.
And that's assuming the character is otherwise well-written and sympathetic. In many cases they are not. When you artificially create certain types of characters to push an agenda, good storywriting tends to suffer.
As for "diversity" in hiring, when it comes to the video game industry, nobody cares what the sexual preferences of some random developer is, or what that developer might deep inside think of being. This is nothing but a conspiracy theory. Nobody is asking applicants "are you gay?" and discriminating against them if they answer yes. Nobody cares, not employees, not corporations, not gamers, what some random developer does in his private life and what goes inside his head. Companies care about qualifications and skill, and gamers care about how good the game is. They don't give a flying f--k about what they do in their private lives.
What the SJWs want is not "diversity" in video game companies. What they want is visible "diversity" there. They are not content with people just keeping their preferences and orientations to themselves, and just merely doing their jobs diligently and efficiently. What they want is for these people to be openly blatant about it, and show it, and virtue-signal about it. In other words, to be assholes about it. Nobody cares what they do in their private lives... and that's the problem! They should care! They should be shown it! The "diversity" should be shoved in their faces, and every aspect of the game development should be tainted by it!
The problem SJWs are having is not that game companies are not "diverse". The problem is that this "diversity" is not visible and blatant enough.
Comments
Post a Comment