Gender Diversity / Politics in games (was Tropes Vs. Women)

[PaB]

It might seem weird to be able to suspend belief enough to have daemons and talking polar bears but not for the race of the actors, but IMO there is a reveal that he is the biological father in the plot that really doesn't work with that casting. However, I acknowledge that I have a general issue with suspending belief in realistic aspects of fiction.

On a slightly related note. It always amused me when people took huge issue with the fact that Jeff Goldblum was able to communicate with, and upload a virus, using his apple mac.... To a giant Alien mother ship

[Benny]

Because he'd have needed Linux.

[Danster]

But... but... but... I'll not go there.

[Broker]

There's a deleted scene where Data explains he's spent years decrypting the alien computer language on the ship they have using that Mac and then him and Jeff work on it more together.

[RubberJohnny]

The idea that criticising violence in nerd stuff, specifically Star Wars, is something niche or done by outsiders is a bit odd.

I mean is there a fan alive who thinks the bit where Anakin kills a bunch of kids in a classroom in the prequels for no reason other than teh evulz is actually good?

[Dig Dug]

The idea that criticising violence in nerd stuff, specifically Star Wars, is something niche or done by outsiders is a bit odd.

I mean is there a fan alive who thinks the bit where Anakin kills a bunch of kids in a classroom in the prequels for no reason other than teh evulz is actually good?

One of the lads I lived with last year actually defended the scene arguing that it needed to be there to establish Anakin becoming evil. I asked him if he understood that the film was a creative work where Lucas could have had him do something else instead.

[Harsin]

In Harry Potter don't the goodies generally use non-lethal knock out spells and stuff and it's the baddies who use the forbidden killing spells?

There's the occasional exception to the rule and a baddie does get ganked, but we're hardly talking Ron Weasley turning into Nathan Drake and mowing down hordes of house elves with his fully automatic wand.

[Alex W.]

I would legit play that game though.

[Harsin]

EA have probably already made it.

I have a vague recollection that one of their many Potter games was basically Gears of Wand.

[Dudley]

I have no idea if that's true but there's no way I can't pos "Gears of Wand".

[NEG]

Harry bloody Potter.

[Anne Summers]

Black Hermione (Noma Dumezweni) is currently playing the lead in my cousins play Linda at the Royal Court theatre. She was called in at the last minute to replace Kim Catrall who pulled out.

(Sorry not GG related but a blatant plug for my cuz's play - go and see it its very good!)

[b00dles]

Harriet Potter.

[Harsin]

Someone needs to make a full on 70s style blacksploitation adaptation of Harry Potter.

[PaB]

Kim Catrall is a far more contraversial appointment, given that Hermione is supposed to be in her 40's .

[Camel]

Someone needs to make a full on 70s style blacksploitation adaptation of Harry Potter.

Harry Poitier.

[RubberJohnny]

Anyway, if we actually cut to the heart of what sir_shrew is getting at here, he's clearly bringing up Anitas dislike of violence in media, both in the Star Wars review and over Doom, and in the Off Topic thread invoking Columbine and moral panics as a comparison to her, in order to paint her as an outside influence with a nefarious agenda. This is a false narrative for a number of reasons:

The first being, obviously, that there is no censorship going on - the last bit of actual censorship in the industry was either Apple stopping political games critical about Drones on their App Store, or 2010's Medal of Honor where in return for access and funding the US military was granted a degree of editorial control over the final production, which they exercised by removing the ability to play as the Taliban in the games multiplayer. Neither of these GG care about because they're seen as coming from the right-wing and therefore Not Really A Problem.

The second is that the narrative of "gaming insider = loves violence" and "gaming outsider = hates violence" is a completely false one. Miyamoto was recently revealed to have found the bodycount of Goldeneye "dispressing" and wanted Rare to work in an ending sequence that revealed no-one died and they all made up afterwards (really), and he's one of gamings most iconic creators, with possibly the longest continuous career. It's impossible to put his career in perspective without taking his viewpoints on the subject into account.

In fact, the entire stealth genre was created largely as a reaction to shooters like Doom - with Warren Spector, one of the most famous designers of the 90s, wanting to create situations where the best option for the player was avoiding combat and violence. Hideo Kojima was similarly influenced, with many of his games featuring an anti-violence message, whether through having the ghosts of everyone you've killed coming back and harrying the player in MGS3 (2004) or refusing to allow players to achieve the best ranks if they played stealthily but violently in MGS: Peace Walker (2008). The ability to play through a stealth game without taking a single life is still a really demanded thing in the genre (as well as some choice based RPGs), as seen by the controversy over Deus Ex: Human Revolution (2011), which featured your character murdering the bosses in cutscenes regardless of your playstyle up to that point.

More recently, AAA games since about 2009 have attempted to examine the violence the main character commits and reflect on it in order to tell better, more believable stories, sometimes amateurishly (Far Cry 3, Bioshock Infinite), but sometimes more maturely (Witcher 3, the Last of Us). Basically the depiction of violence has always been an issue with two sides within the industry throughout the entire history of games, through the 80s and the 90s and the modern day, and not liking violence or excessive violence doesn't make you a non-gamer or an outsider (and even if they did, they wouldn't make your position invalid).

[NEG]

On the topic of games examining violence: Undertale

[ZOK]

You don't have to play Doom to dismiss it as being depressingly violent - beyond playing it enough to learn that it is (depressingly, if you so find it) violent.

Criticism, Stu. Nothing is immune. No thoughtful criticism is redundant. Anyone thoughtful can justifiably give it.

[Alex W.]

I think shrew still has trouble looking at criticism and analysis as anything beyond a value judgement on the material or a buyer's guide. It's supposed to help understand the art.

[NEG]

Doom requires treatment?

[SeanR]

Doom requires treatment?

Medikits and stimpacks

[Jarik]

I've never seen the point in trying to dismiss criticism or stop discussion by saying that that is what the creator made the thing to be. Creators aren't perfect, & if they'd made a character or story that doesn't make sense in terms of plot or character development, then they should be called out on it. Sometimes, such discussion can help reveal deeper meanings that the creator purposefully built into the work & in some rare cases, these deeper meanings have emerged without being intended & the creator can choose to use them into their future works, if they care to do so.

I've tried my hand at making some creative works, & when I've put them out there I continually invite people to criticise them. I want to know if I'm messing up creatively or just overlooking something because I'm too close to it, so I can then try & use that feedback to refine & improve my ability to create.

[b00dles]

There's a strange overlap with people that have difficulties with individual people and issues - the whole 'Oh a bullied lesbian are you? You pretty little snowflake, grow up' mentality - and people that can't take criticism of things they like such as the GGers. It's odd.

[Broker]

But you're not criticising the point, you're saying it's pointless to discuss it or make the criticism in the first place.

Edit: Actually, you're belittling the point made without offering any of your own insight then making that point about criticising it in the same post.

[b00dles]

Not sure how you came to that conclusion shrew?

[PaB]

If people think criticising Doom for being violent is revelatory and has any merit, or that criticism itself is beyond criticism then there's little point continuing this discussion.

I dunno if this has happened. I haven't read that much of the thread. But I have to say criticising Doom for being too violent is about as worthwhile as criticising "Mind your language" for promoting racial stereotypes. It is a product of its time. You cannot judge something made 20 odd years ago by todays standard. Its fucking stupid.

People will try and make a name for themselves writing any old shite these days. Not all criticism is valid, and I don't care how much you have thought about it.

[SeanR]

People will try and make a name for themselves writing any old shite these days.

Mmm...

[matt0]

I dunno if this has happened. I haven't read that much of the thread. But I have to say criticising Doom for being too violent is about as worthwhile as criticising "Mind your language" for promoting racial stereotypes. It is a product of its time. You cannot judge something made 20 odd years ago by todays standard. Its fucking stupid.

People will try and make a name for themselves writing any old shite these days. Not all criticism is valid, and I don't care how much you have thought about it.

I don't know. I love Doom, to the extent that when my only way of playing it was in a postage stamp sized window on my Dad's 386 I used to have dreams about playing it on a decent set up. Not dreams about being inside Doom, not dreams about the fiction of Doom, just dreams about actually playing Doom. To this day just knowing that I can play it on my PC or xbox, full screen, full speed whenever I want to makes me absurdly happy.

But I think, if pushed, I could probably make a decent case for how Doom, in becoming the template for the FPS and the FPS becoming one of the most prominent genres in AAA game design has had an unintended detrimental effect on the evolution of videogames. A focus on slapstick ultraviolence that undercuts the narrative, thematic and philosophical ambitions of plenty of games just because it's how things are done, how you make an FPS (Bioshock is a franchise that suffers terribly from this). And it started with Doom. So yeah, even as a huge fan, I think there's some merit in exploring the idea that the violence in Doom might have a downside.

"You cannot judge something made 20 odd years ago by todays standard" - of course you can if you know what you're talking about and you frame the circumstances surrounding what you're discussing. Books, movies, games - they don't get hermetically sealed in a criticism proof vault after 15-20 years.

[Rev]

I dunno if this has happened. I haven't read that much of the thread. But I have to say criticising Doom for being too violent is about as worthwhile as criticising "Mind your language" for promoting racial stereotypes. It is a product of its time. You cannot judge something made 20 odd years ago by todays standard. Its fucking stupid.

People will try and make a name for themselves writing any old shite these days. Not all criticism is valid, and I don't care how much you have thought about it.

They're talking about Doom 4 as Anita tweeted about it at E3. The one that hasn't come out yet and is about nineteen times more violent than Doom was.

Perhaps read the thread? It helps with things like knowing what people are talking about in the thread.