From the article:
“Play is an integral part of human evolution and learning,” she says, mentioning that this is a topic she covers in her book. “Gaming, being the most refined form of play in our time, has much to offer. Instead of focusing on what gaming is not, it’s more effective to showcase its true essence. The industry’s effort to create a more diverse range of games, beyond merely violent and intense ones, will help showcase the broad spectrum of gaming as an expression of creativity.”
I feel the problem is not the industry but the fanbase. As of the last few years, it’s become pretty common to see videogames become target of hatred for “going woke”: H:FW’s Aloy’s “peach fuzz”, TLOU2’s Abby being too masculine, women not living to the average beauty standard, LGBT characters “shoved down people’s throats”, character editors decoupling gender and sex or using gender-neutral language, narrative being cringe because it targets millennials (as if older games didn’t target young audiences, too)… The industry is going forward, but I don’t think the fanbase is ready yet.
Sometimes I think the fanbase is regressing, even. I’ve seen people lamenting increased “politics” in their videogame, yet saying that MGS or FFVII or Bioshock are their favourite games. Gamers don’t even pay attention to what they consume, they merely parrot whatever their favourite influencer says. “Woke” is a meaningless term that gets thrown around whenever they don’t like something.
Fan base isn’t regressing - there’s just an increasingly polarized contingent that won’t stop wailing about every snub.
Overall the gaming fan base is growing because of this embracing of diversity.
Yeah it’s just a loud group of dipshits that want games to be a safe space for their regressive views.
Ding ding ding
The Helldivers 2 Steam review page is covered with reviews from accounts that don’t even own the game begging Arrowhead to “not add WOKENESS!” to the game.
What review page are you talking about??
Are you sure you’re not just hearing that people have complained and then assuming they actually did?
Sorry, you’re correct- it’s not the reviews, but the comments on any announcement made by the devs that I was remembering.
The lack of mouse icon next to their names means those Steam accounts don’t own the game.
I see three comments, two of which mention wokeness and one of which mentions sending the dev team to re-education camp.
None of the comments is solely about wokeness. Wokeness is mentioned in conjunction with politics.
One of the comments wants to make sure the game stays “neutral”.
Note that zero of these comments are complaining about diversity. To those who criticize wholeness, it is a distinct thing from diversity.
Do you know what people are referring to when they use that word?
I feel like that’s just a very loud minority among those who play games. As you’ve so stated, the majority of people who play these games either do not care for politics in video games, and another subset prefer it that way.
If even the greediest of companies in the video game industry keep doing that, that means they’ve analyzed the market and having politics in video games might have between no to a positive impact on sales.
I disagree. The rule is “sex sells”, always has, always will be, period.
The people that complain about “wokeness” in games are a small but loud minority. The majority doesn’t care, hells seeing the steam achievements for some games the majority doesn’t even care to finish a game past the tutorial yet alone care about story or characters.
The problem is the approach to game design has changed. In the earlier stages of gaming, you would take a fun concept (finding perfect fits for boxes) and make it into a game (Tetris), that was all there was, Super Mario was literally called “Jump & Run Man” at one point. It was the essence of fun presented in a replayable form. Now games have to have a story, morals, relatable characters or some sort of overlaying message. This together with good gameplay can create a very good game no doubt. But each aspect has to be good on its own.
Take away the story from Last of Us and it’s essentially a 3rd person arena shooter, but it’s a good one at that. This alone would be a good selling point, add on top the story and you have an objectively good game.
But take Saint Row 5 as an example, take away the story and it’s a less than mediocre 3rd Person sandbox game, the fact that the story isn’t compelling either makes it objectively bad.
Rember the Hot/Crazy scale from His I Met Your Mother? Well there is also a Hot/Boring scale for games. If your game is boring it has to compensate by having hotter characters, if it’s fun it can get away with uglier ones. I can name countless examples where this is true.Studios often overlook this connection. I’m all for diversification of the actual development environment but not the games themselves. It should always be fun first.
Never in my life have I heard anybody say “Are you going to get new game …? I’ve heard you can play as a black woman in this one. So cool.”
Studios then get upset because their model “Here diversity. Where money?” isn’t paying off.
It’s like not wanting to buy a cheaply made plastic valve for a boiler over a solid metal one and the company asks “Why are you not buying it? We made it blue.”The fanbase is never going to change, because at some point we all realize that we want value for our money and often times studios spend so much time and effort making a game diverse, they forget to make it fun.
Never in my life have I heard anybody say “Are you going to get new game …? I’ve heard you can play as a black woman in this one. So cool.”
Hrm, anecdotally I have quite a lot of formerly non-gamer friends who were really hyped for say, Life is Strange: True Colors, specifically because they were excited about how Alex breaks some beauty norms and gets to flirt with Steph on top of that.
Of course, anecdotally.
But it’s important to keep in mind that we’re no longer an industry of 5 teams creating 20 games a year. There’s so many games that there is more than enough space for every game. From absolutely purist near-identityless gameplay-only designs (Which exist in droves) to huge mass-market hyper-produced open worlds all the way to purist story/feels only visual novels and experimental art pieces.
And each of these categories has more games each year than the entire market around the Gameboy time had. Gaming is insanely big now.
You’re blaming games not being fun on devs “wasting time” to ensure diversity in their games? You realize the people who work on the story and characters aren’t the same as the ones coding the game mechanics right? The two have almost nothing to do with one another. Studios aren’t forgetting to make games fun due to diversity lmao. They are having to spend a lot more man hours than they did in the past because of the advancements in development tenchology.
Sure, it is largely the fanbase, however I also think that the game industry seems to sometimes do somewhat of a “woke-washing”, meaning opically supporting the LGBTQIA movement because of financial, shitstorm-prevention or other reasons than just wanting to create more diverse and inclusive games.
For instance I like Hogwarts Legacy, but it also takes place in the Victorian era, and it seems to project the modern tolerant society ideals onto the wizarding world of that time.
Depicting the society as inclusive and diverse is somewhat history revisionist. If you play as a non-binary or trans person at that time, then you should have to deal with prejudice and marginalization, otherwise it is just “woke-wash” the history.
So, IMO there are some cases, especially in historic (fantasy) games, where injecting modern ideals and standards might not fit or needs to be better addressed, than just let it be cosmetic.
They shouldn’t do a halfhearted job.
People just want to play a game. Not have to go from a normal non sexualized zombie game to a now weirdly sexualized zombie game. And then they were made to be the bad guy for not wanting to play the game. If I don’t want to watch a LGB kind of movie that’s no problem because I’m not LGBT but when it comes to games I’m homophobic for not wanting to participate.
The problem is the industry thinks the fans owes it to them to play their shitty based game. We don’t have to play if we don’t want to. And it doesn’t make us non inclusive for not.
This same person will claim that Dead Rising, a series that’s had hot twin sisters battle you with katanas, is not sexualized.
That has to be copium. If I don’t want to play the game then I don’t have to lmao be mad. Idc if hot twin sisters battle me with katanas if you do then… Don’t play?
I think you missed the point of the person you replied to.
‘Going woke,’ is referring to intent.
Are you meeting quotes or actually engaging with race on a substantiative level.
It’s undoubtable that a lot of race casting in recent times has been to appease audiences rather than and honest engagement with reality and irl race relations.
Intent… it matters.
Intent does matter.
But the vast majority of complaints about a game being “woke” are just the inclusion of a character this a minority in some way. The complaint isn’t about how they’re included, just that they are, usually as a main or highly visible character.
I disagree… of course in countries like America you would have some outspoken actual racist n shit…
But the vast majority of people just don’t like casting for castings sake…
Nobody bitches about sigourney weaver in alien… nobody bitches about Denzel playing leading roles cos he’s black, calling it 'woke. ’
Why don’t people call that woke?
Because its obvious. When a project is hiring just to fill a quota, often…it is extremely obvious.
The vast vast vast majority of people don’t care what race, gender,sexuality you are, just as long as those things werent being taken into account when trying to get a job.
Yaknow… basic equal human rights stuff.
I think greater access to game development tools has been a very good thing for the industry. These days, I’m generally much more interested in what’s coming from indie developers than any of the big companies, with a few exceptions. I think that’s the best way to increase the diversity of games and game developers. Greater access to game development resources will help to democratize the gaming industry.
Yep, the vast majority of the games I buy at this point are coming from indies.
The main issue is large studios want to make a safe game that does everything and appeals to everyone. Meanwhile, indies are making games that are fun-first and targeted at specific audiences, rather than just the mean.
Games like Factorio could be made by a big studio, but it wasn’t, because it don’t have mass appeal. Meanwhile, if you are in it’s target audience, it is a 10/10 game. And it isn’t like the studio had to shovel $200m into a pit to make this 10/10 game.
Gaming is not the most refined form of play. The most refined form of play is unstructured, spontaneous, and uses imagination. Gaming is the opposite of that. It is essentially a grim struggle to perform at one’s best in a 100% defined environment and ruleset.
I’m a gamer. Mad respect for gaming. I use it to achieve flow and improve the precision and skill of my brain.
But I don’t really consider it “playing” in the sense that puppies and little kids play.
I’m all for inclusion of everyone and others being treated fairly.
What I’m not for is how it’s being implemented in the industry currently.
It’s an inclusion for me, exclusion for thee, motto, and it’s ruining some games.
please elaborate. because from what I’m seeing, people are outraged over just having more character creation options or more variety of characters. i can’t see how that’s exclusion.
How so? As in, who is being excluded and how so?
