Gormongous Posted May 22, 2014 No, my argument is that we have about four pieces of a complex jigsaw puzzle. People have every right to have their own instinctual reactions--my issue is with people continuing to bemoan a moot point. As I stated much earlier in this thread, I don't expect Far Cry 4 to handle its chosen subject matter in a thoughtful manner, but nothing yet presented has managed to raise my hackles, and much of the controversy is mired in the false assertion that the character is a WASP. Colin Moriarty over at IGN has a surprisingly cogent take on the issue at hand. First, I could really care less if some writer at IGN thinks it's perfectly okay to use the centuries-old and utterly horrific history of Western imperialism just to flag a character as evil. He can even try to use the "games should be art" argument, it's still stupid, because very rarely in good movies or books is a character a Nazi or a rapist or something blatantly offensive just to make sure we know to hate them. I'd call it out there and I'm calling it out here. It speaks to me of the tradition at Ubisoft of careless and facile writing in the name of supposedly "deep" stories that really go nowhere. Second, and this goes back to some earlier points, you don't get to tell someone they can't be offended. If I open a random book and find a racist diatribe against American Indians, I get to be pissed off. I don't have to read the entire book to make sure the diatribe isn't properly contextualized and dramatically appropriate, then start being pissed off, and even if it is, I'm still allowed to be pissed off. It's the same here. If Merus' Indian friend finds the Far Cry 4 box art to be offensive because it's chock full of imperialist and blasphemous imagery, not to mention if anyone else does for any other reason, then it's offensive, no matter Ubisoft's entirely assumed but no doubt milquetoast good intentions. Third, thank you, Argobot. The only way there's not something racially shitty in Far Cry 4 is if the player character is non-white, too. A game entirely made up of native characters doing their own thing without a white savior or white oppressor would make me take back everything I've said about this game, but I'm not too worried, because there's no way in hell that Ubisoft's going to lose the valuable "subconsciously racist bro" market by having no white character with whom to identify. I also just find it problematic that the Far Cry series has somehow established itself as being about heavy issues like colonialism and imperialism when no game has actually handled it well. Far Cry had virtually no commentary, Far Cry 2 left a lot to implications but took no clear stance, Far Cry 3 was a pile of "white savior" bullshit, and Far Cry: Blood Dragon was bacon turtle ninja laser. When exactly did Ubisoft show us that they could tackle such a huge and thorny issue? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bjorn Posted May 22, 2014 Colin Moriarty over at IGN has a surprisingly cogent take on the issue at hand. I just read that, holy shit is that a laughable piece of dross. Classic ign.com. In short, it seemed to me to be the stuff of a good, believable antagonist. The guy in the pink suit with the rocket launcher sitting on a Buddha throne is believable? And as a gamer hungry for storytelling, I don't like the insinuation -- and this insinuation is fairly loud -- that games just aren't allowed to deal with tough issues, lest they offend someone. And what pray tell leads you to think that tough issues are going to be on display here with the pink villain man? Go fuck yourself Colin for claiming that the strawman you oppose doesn't want tough issues in games. What if this blond man is, in fact, a shameless, violent, narcissistic racist? Doesn't that give you a strong reason to dislike him, and a powerful motive to chase him through Far Cry 4's campaign? Isn't that more compelling than some vanilla, sanitized antagonist with no noticeable personality flaws or nefarious motives? What games on god's green earth has this man been playing? Racism is, unfortunately, a very real force in contemporary culture, so why should gaming ignore it? Uuuuunnngggghhhhhhhhh, my fucking brain hurt reading that. Does Colin actually know what racism is, or the role that it plays in video games? Let's not get caught in a cycle of endless negativity while holding our beloved video games to standards other works of art aren't held to. Wait, wut? Colin, do you have any experience with film or literature criticism or fandom? I typically can't look up anything about popular films and novels without finding interesting essays or comments looking at them through the lens of different cultures, genders, races, etc. I'm not normally one to throw this word out, but that entire piece comes from such a blatant position of white male privilege that it's practically dripping from the sentences. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nappi Posted May 22, 2014 I'm not sure if this has been posted already: http://www.ibtimes.co.in/far-cry-4-plot-synopsis-leaked-indian-be-protagonist-600731 Nor am I sure why I continue to read this thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bjorn Posted May 22, 2014 I'm not sure if this has been posted already: http://www.ibtimes.co.in/far-cry-4-plot-synopsis-leaked-indian-be-protagonist-600731 Nor am I sure why I continue to read this thread. That's actually cool, and I hope that it's accurate. It's entertaining. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted May 22, 2014 That's actually cool, and I hope that it's accurate. Yeah, that sounds like the best possible scenario of what Far Cry 4 is shaping up to be — and precisely what I said Ubisoft wouldn't have the courage to do. Oh well, my foot fits fine into my mouth. I guess I'll be watching with keen interest! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Argobot Posted May 22, 2014 I'm not sure if this has been posted already: http://www.ibtimes.co.in/far-cry-4-plot-synopsis-leaked-indian-be-protagonist-600731 Nor am I sure why I continue to read this thread. If that's true then why wouldn't you lead with it in your initial marketing? If you're considerate enough to include a non-white character as your protagonist, then I hope you'd also be considerate enough to look at that promotional art and gauge what most reactions will be. Unless they wanted to go for that first shock and outrage so they could later pull out this protagonist and say to their detractors: "See, we're not racist! You are!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nappi Posted May 22, 2014 Yeah, cool if true, I guess, but weird marketing nonetheless. Anyway, here is what is actually important: http://www.ibtimes.co.in/far-cry-4-rumored-animals-himalayan-kingdom-600472 (Quality article. You should read it in its entirety. It blends rumors and speculation with possible facts in a very interesting way.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Architecture Posted May 22, 2014 First, I could really care less if some writer at IGN thinks it's perfectly okay to use the centuries-old and utterly horrific history of Western imperialism just to flag a character as evil. Western imperialism Western imperialism http://www.ibtimes.co.in/far-cry-4-plot-synopsis-leaked-indian-be-protagonist-600731 Western imperialism Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted May 22, 2014 Man, fuck off. Western imperialism can happen without white people present, that's what's so fucked up about the world. Besides, if I punch you, but say I didn't mean to hurt you, does it not hurt? If I say the N-word, but say I didn't know it was a racial slur, is it not a racial slur? Intent is not fucking magic and the author is fucking dead. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Nappi Posted May 22, 2014 Quality post there Architecture! Perhaps not quite as good as the color palette one but still very nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gamemore Posted May 22, 2014 If that's true then why wouldn't you lead with it in your initial marketing? If you're considerate enough to include a non-white character as your protagonist, then I hope you'd also be considerate enough to look at that promotional art and gauge what most reactions will be. Unless they wanted to go for that first shock and outrage so they could later pull out this protagonist and say to their detractors: "See, we're not racist! You are!" I guess because if they are going the Far Cry 3 route of "wacky, edgy madness" they probably want to focus on the wacky, edgy villain rather than the protagonist who cares about his mom. And for what it's worth (very little): I perceived the guy on the box art as asian (perhaps with mixed parents) even before I saw it confirmed, so I guess it's not entirely unthinkable that they assumed it would be the same for most people. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted May 22, 2014 If that's true then why wouldn't you lead with it in your initial marketing? If you're considerate enough to include a non-white character as your protagonist, then I hope you'd also be considerate enough to look at that promotional art and gauge what most reactions will be. Unless they wanted to go for that first shock and outrage so they could later pull out this protagonist and say to their detractors: "See, we're not racist! You are!" Ehhhhhh it's really hard as a creator to be able to see something that might be obvious to an outsider. I'm not saying they shouldn't have had some other step to bullet-proof their marketing, but if someone tells you before you see the image that it's going to be of an Asian with blonde hair lording over another Asian, you are definitely more inclined to see the Asian. They probably failed in not having a blind test with some test subjects somewhere, or something. I just find it kind of iffy to blame a creator for not seeing something that they never intended in the first place. FWIW, I always thought the dude looked Asian (because I've seen Asians with clothes/hair like that before), but I also would've been willing to accept that he was a white dude with rebellious-Asian hair-style and attire. I didn't even consider he COULD be white until after I started reading this thread. But I don't blame anyone for seeing white dude because that's what we're trained to see more often than not. I also disagree that their goal was to shock. But I guess no one will ever know for sure, unless they come out and say that was their intention. (Obviously they'd never lie about that, but they might lie by saying they DIDN'T intend, and of course they're never going to say they DIDN'T intend.) La dee da this is all dumb. Also: Thrik: Yeah, I really do think it's the hair that's throwing most people off. But I dunno maybe not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ariskany_evan Posted May 22, 2014 Love that ********* is blocked but not that word. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted May 22, 2014 Love that ********* is blocked but not that word. Yeah, I'm regretting having typed it. It's changed now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bjorn Posted May 22, 2014 If I make a video game poster with a slightly Asian looking guy on eating fried chicken in front of a watermelon patch, is that okay? Don't worry guys, it's totally not racist, and has no connection to the history or imagery of racism in America. See, the guy's got almond shaped eyes, that makes it okay. You're supposed to hate him cause he's the racist, geddit? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Architecture Posted May 22, 2014 Man, fuck off. Western imperialism can happen without white people present, that's what's so fucked up about the world. Western Imperialism cannot exist without Westerners, of which there appear to be none in Far Cry 4 thus far (excepting that awful-looking Hurk DLC pre-order bonus). Besides, if I punch you, but say I didn't mean to hurt you, does it not hurt? If I say [redacted due to Gormongous's self-edit] but say I didn't know it was a racial slur, is it not a racial slur? It's more akin to you accidentally stumbling into me and me perceiving it as an act of violence, even after you apologize profusely. Or if you describe someone as niggardly and I continue to assume you're racist after you explain yourself. Intent is not fucking magic and the author is fucking dead. This isn't about intent, this is about the misinterpretation of a single image with mounting evidence to the contrary. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted May 22, 2014 Western Imperialism cannot exist without Westerners, of which there appear to be none in Far Cry 4 thus far (excepting that awful-looking Hurk DLC pre-order bonus). It's more akin to you accidentally stumbling into me and me perceiving it as an act of violence, even after you apologize profusely. Or if you describe someone as niggardly and I continue to assume you're racist after you explain yourself. This isn't about intent, this is about the misinterpretation of a single image with mounting evidence to the contrary. I see, so you haven't actually bothered to read my posts, since you're contesting points I've already conceded and ignoring a lot of what I say is actually problematic about the unintended consequences of Far Cry 4's imagery, and would prefer to keep arguing with a strawman you've invented for your own purposes. Fantastic, that means I'm done here. Thanks, everybody! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gamemore Posted May 22, 2014 Western Imperialism cannot exist without Westerners, of which there appear to be none in Far Cry 4 thus far (excepting that awful-looking Hurk DLC pre-order bonus). Much of the cold war was characterised by non-westerners fighting other non-westerners in order to propagate the interests of westerners as well as their own. Much of the conflicts of the post-cold war world are still heavily influenced by structures and systems that were instigated by westerners during earlier times. Considering the history of the region in question, I doubt that it is possible to completely leave out western imperialism (as well as later eastern imperialism) and still depict it with anything approaching verisimilitude. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted May 22, 2014 This thread is dangerous waters right now. Everyone chillllllllllllll! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Griddlelol Posted May 23, 2014 Here's two swatches of color--one sampled from Japanese actor Ken Watanabe, the other from the FC4 box art posted on page 2 of this thread: Can you guess which is which? Seriously? Come on, you're smarter than that. Anyone can cherry pick, don't be one of those people. The guy on the cover, without an in depth analysis looks white. Whether or not he is intended to be is irrelevant - as you said: we have no details on the cover art or the story of the game. The high resolution looks less white, but I wouldn't go as far to say "oh yeah, he's 100% east asian!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted May 23, 2014 The guy on the cover, without an in depth analysis looks white. To you. To some of us (me included) he doesn't. Or didn't until people started saying he looks white. You're making yourself just as guilty of whatever-the-fuck-is-happening-in-this-thread as Architecture is. You can't state an opinion as if it is a fact. It's not conducive to good, well, anything. It only serves to perpetuate stupid shitty arguments instead of actually discussing the matter like mature human beings. EDIT: Sorry, didn't mean to pick on you in particular. But it's just sort of the whole thread is overwhelmingly like that. Shit always gets heated when there's something potentially controversial based entirely on our feeble human perceptive abilities, but it doesn't have to get uncivil. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Griddlelol Posted May 23, 2014 Apologies if I'm coming across as though I'm stating a fact. The reason I put "looks" every time was to indicate that is was what I thought, not what I know. As in he looks like he is to me, rather than he is. I never once said he is for sure (on purpose!) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted May 23, 2014 To you. To some of us (me included) he doesn't. Or didn't until people started saying he looks white. You're making yourself just as guilty of whatever-the-fuck-is-happening-in-this-thread as Architecture is. You can't state an opinion as if it is a fact. It's not conducive to good, well, anything. It only serves to perpetuate stupid shitty arguments instead of actually discussing the matter like mature human beings. EDIT: Sorry, didn't mean to pick on you in particular. But it's just sort of the whole thread is overwhelmingly like that. Shit always gets heated when there's something potentially controversial based entirely on our feeble human perceptive abilities, but it doesn't have to get uncivil. To explain my part in this, my problem is if we're stating any opinion as fact, even the opinion of the developer about what they've made. A developer can accidentally make something really not okay, as often they do, so acting as though theirs is the last word is a really high-handed and unpleasant way of shutting down a conversation that always ought to be happening everywhere. These are the "tough issues" with which games should be dealing, not how evil a pink-suited villain needs to be. Honestly, the culprit for me here is Ubisoft. The information about this game has been one leak after another, followed by a lot of half-assed clarification-as-damage-control. Why can't they get out ahead of it instead of using Twitter and the like to just hint at good intentions? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Twig Posted May 23, 2014 Griddlelol: all right fair enough. I misunderstood! Gormongous: I'm not at all trying to say ubisoft is innocent (though given that I assumed the dude was Asian from the get go, I'm predisposed to believe their clarifications without reservation). I just am sort of annoyed at the way everyone's just going nuts. Everyone! All of you! No exceptions! Feel guiltyyyyyyyyyy and ashaaaaaaamed! That said I don't like when the conversation turns toward "video games should be addressing tough issues" because it just sort of devolves into "well but this game isn't trying to" " I'm not saying this one should but someone should!" " okay but then we agree this one isn't trying to" "well but maybe it would've been better if it did!" "But it didn't though" etc Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gormongous Posted May 23, 2014 That said I don't like when the conversation turns toward "video games should be addressing tough issues" because it just sort of devolves into "well but this game isn't trying to" " I'm not saying this one should but someone should!" " okay but then we agree this one isn't trying to" "well but maybe it would've been better if it did!" "But it didn't though" etc I was more just jokingly referencing the IGN article posted earlier in which a racially ambiguous but handsomely smirking pink-suited villain is presented as somehow representative of the "tough issues" that video games should be tackling these days. Video games can be as serious or silly as they want to be, of course, but I hate so much that the culture surrounding them is still so insecure and immature that the response to "This offends me" is as often "Well, here's why you're wrong, so shut up" as "Wow, we're so sorry, that sucks." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites