Boris Stoke

Far Cry 4: A grenade rolls down everest

Recommended Posts

The only response it evoked from me was "hey looks like a yakuza dude" except that's racist cause if they're in the Himalayas they sure as hell aren't Japanese and I couldn't tell the difference anyway because I'm super racist.

 

Dang this image makes me racist. ):

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only response it evoked from me was "hey looks like a yakuza dude" except that's racist cause if they're in the Himalayas they sure as hell aren't Japanese and I couldn't tell the difference anyway because I'm super racist.

 

Dang this image makes me racist. ):

 

Nah Twig, it just makes you think a racist thing. There's a big difference there. It's okay to think racist things, so long as you're trying your best not to do it. I think them all the time and I consider myself pretty good at not thinking them. It's just the way the world works, unfortunately.

 

Gormongous, stop editing your posts.

 

Excuse me?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah Twig, it just makes you think a racist thing. There's a big difference there. It's okay to think racist things, so long as you're trying your best not to do it. I think them all the time and I consider myself pretty good at not thinking them. It's just the way the world works, unfortunately.

Holy shit, what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy shit, what?

 

I really don't have time right now to go into microaggressions or Social Justice 101, Architecture. Suffice to say, everyone's a little racist, because that's how society works, but most of us are working on it, which is the best we can do, so there's no need to shame anyone unless they're defending their racist thoughts and actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OBAiEy5.jpg

 

You're excused.

 

Wait, what? That's exactly the post that's there. What point are you trying to make?

 

Honestly, I'm done with this thread... uh, again? I can't believe I'm getting guff for finding something wrong with the art that everybody was mocking a few pages back but that now makes me a hypocrite because I ought to play the whole goddamn game to have enough context to talk about the box it comes in. Call me back when ObjectiveGameReviews.com buys the forums and the ban on opinions becomes official, alright?

 

I probably won't even play the damn game because I found the UI and art density in the last one to be suffocating, so I really am a hypocrite there. Blah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope I'm not out of line in saying this, but I think this thread has officially been Waluigi'd.

 

:waluigi:  :waluigi:  :waluigi:  :waluigi:  :waluigi:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah Twig, it just makes you think a racist thing. There's a big difference there. It's okay to think racist things, so long as you're trying your best not to do it. I think them all the time and I consider myself pretty good at not thinking them. It's just the way the world works, unfortunately.

For the record, I completely agree with what you're saying in this post, but I was just being silly because it's a silly thing that occurred to me and I wanted to be silly.

 

In actuality, he doesn't look to have "Western clothes" to me (well, I guess he strictly, objectively DOES, but what I'm getting at is...). Instead, he's wearing stereotypical Asian mafia/gangster attire. That could be its own set of problems, but I sorta disagree with the idea that it's got anything to do with Western influence beyond what already exists in Asian crime fiction.

 

...

 

aaaaanyway, waluigi time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys what's going on in this thread--

 

--uh--

 

--well at least I can back up the idea that it's basically impossible for people who grew up in 'civilised' cultures to not be racist, including the victims of racism. Similarly for sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and any other kind of marginalisation. The best you can hope for is to catch when you are being racist, learn from it, and resolve to check yourself in the future, in the hope that if enough people do it, it'll eventually stop being passed onto the next generation. Being racist doesn't mean that you want to lynch black people, it means you have ideas you can't quite get away from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The image itself is not racist.  The people who created the image are not racist.  These people used imagery generally accepted as signs of reckless affluence in most branches of modern society to depict a character.  If the viewer takes that imagery and the characters depicted, and assigns them a race or ethnicity, even for the purpose of rejecting said racial categorization, then it is the viewer who is racist.  It is the viewer who had made a judgement based upon stereotypical preconceptions of ethnicity, not the artist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The image itself is not racist.  The people who created the image are not racist.  These people used imagery generally accepted as signs of reckless affluence in most branches of modern society to depict a character.  If the viewer takes that imagery and the characters depicted, and assigns them a race or ethnicity, even for the purpose of rejecting said racial categorization, then it is the viewer who is racist.  It is the viewer who had made a judgement based upon stereotypical preconceptions of ethnicity, not the artist.

 

I don't even have the energy to argue this anymore. You're talking like people can't do unintentionally racist things, for instance by carelessly using "generally accepted imagery" in certain contexts without taking into account all possible interpretations. If we don't have that common ground, even after you've read all the intelligent and considered arguments of people other than me in this thread, then I don't know that we have anything to talk about.

 

Really, I'm reminded of this fiasco from 2008 (except replacing the wartime propaganda poster with pictures like this one) and with the same arguments all over again. It's all just so exhausting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The image itself is not racist.  The people who created the image are not racist.  These people used imagery generally accepted as signs of reckless affluence in most branches of modern society to depict a character.  If the viewer takes that imagery and the characters depicted, and assigns them a race or ethnicity, even for the purpose of rejecting said racial categorization, then it is the viewer who is racist.  It is the viewer who had made a judgement based upon stereotypical preconceptions of ethnicity, not the artist.

 

Oh boy, it's Mr. No You're The Racist.

 

Apparently the people who created this image are fucking unicorns because they are the only people in Western civilisation who aren't even the tiniest bit racist, and it's lucky that we have Mr. No You're The Racist here who is uniquely qualified to bring us this scoop, having probed deeply into their subconscious and discovered that they have never thought that someone of a different culture, colour or creed is different than them. And apparently images of reckless affluence don't have a racial component at all despite many of them being rooted in systemic exploitation, because as soon as we decided that was bad, suddenly they all changed their meaning overnight. Because that's how it works! People don't do blackface because poop jokes and puns are in right now.

 

It is delicious to me that on this forum, Mr. No You're The Racist goes by the handle of WackyForeigner. Like, if you're looking for someone who has never once thought how the experiences of a person of another race might differ from their own, the first name you'd look for would be someone who named themselves after a trope built on the idea that people from other cultures are inherently unknowable, wouldn't you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That original image they released was supposed to be the box art right? Because after reading through this thread (good grief) I went to the Far Cry 4 site out of curiosity and I guess they changed it to remove the dude with the grenade? He's also not propping his foot on the statue's head anymore, though I still think the image is kinda shitty in that regard.

 

If the rumor of the protagonist being Indian turns out to be true, I think Ubisoft missed an opportunity there by not putting him or her (haha right) on the cover instead of this cartoon villain guy who appears ethnically a bit ambiguous to say the least. How often do bad guys get the cover anyway really? I mean to be fair, Far Cry 3 did the same thing, but I think it would have been cool of them to go the other way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't even have the energy to argue this anymore. You're talking like people can't do unintentionally racist things, for instance by carelessly using "generally accepted imagery" in certain contexts without taking into account all possible interpretations. If we don't have that common ground, even after you've read all the intelligent and considered arguments of people other than me in this thread, then I don't know that we have anything to talk about.

 

Really, I'm reminded of this fiasco from 2008 (except replacing the wartime propaganda poster with pictures like this one) and with the same arguments all over again. It's all just so exhausting.

 

I very much believe people can do unintentionally racist things.  My point is that the people labeling this image as racist are doing something unintentionally racist.  We don't have to argue about that, it's merely a comment on the subject. 

 

 

Namecalling

 

Strawman

 

Ad Hominem

 

I am a fairly tall U.S. citizen of Irish descent.  I am naturally not very coordinated and a little bit clumsy.  I like to drink, and when I do, I tend to talk very loudly and be pretty obnoxious.  I would imagine this behavior would lead a person native to a city or country that I am visiting to consider me to be "wacky."  That, of course, assumes that it is possible to consider myself as a foreigner to another culture, and not just everyone else as foreign to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to talk very loudly and be pretty obnoxious.  I would imagine this behavior would lead a person native to a city or country that I am visiting to consider me to be "wacky." 

 

FYI and outside of any other context, it would lead me to consider you an arsehole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see we agree that the people who made this cover are also unintentionally racist and that the imagery they used has racist origins they should have been more sensitive to, given that the only bit you actually objected to was the bit where I took a cheap shot at your handle. Still didn't really work because you replied that an obnoxious American is surely wacky and not the prevailing cultural stereotype outside of America, and did not reply that you're going to prove me wrong and listen to the marginalised to try to understand how they feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me back when ObjectiveGameReviews.com buys the forums and the ban on opinions becomes official, alright?

My site's not making enough money to buy the Idle Thumbs forums. Yet.

I like this place because on the other forums I post on I have to be the one to bring up the whole "oh gee Far Cry is racist again, I guess this is just the racism franchise now" thing and it gets tiring. Meanwhile over here I can just ignore the thread for a while and people are already doing my job for me. It's nice to know I'm not the only one in the world who thinks it's a little silly that UbiSoft just happen to keep being super racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this place because on the other forums I post on I have to be the one to bring up the whole "oh gee Far Cry is racist again, I guess this is just the racism franchise now" thing and it gets tiring. Meanwhile over here I can just ignore the thread for a while and people are already doing my job for me. It's nice to know I'm not the only one in the world who thinks it's a little silly that UbiSoft just happen to keep being super racist.

 

Yeah, I don't know. I feel more than a little sympathy for Ubisoft, even though "this is just the racism franchise now" is what I often find myself thinking anyway. The entire concept of the Far Cry series means that any game in it is going to attract more than its fair share of problematic if not outright racist elements. Because the premise is literally "a far cry from normal," they've got to show their primarily white, primarily Western, primarily male (assumed) audience something that will be exotic for them, which is inevitably going to be at best implicitly racist (yet another foreign locale full of unfamiliar sights and strange customs) and at worst explicitly racist (an East Asian who presents as white with bleached-blonde hair and a Western-style suit using a more traditionally dressed East Asian as part of his chair, like I said before). I know they're doing their best, if the amount of ink spilled by and about Jeffrey Yohalem is anything to tell, but it's still mostly a lost cause, because it's impossible to make a game that takes place within a foreign culture without including racist elements, if only just because there aren't any tools to talk about other cultures without comparative and hierarchical language that inevitably ascribes some level of value.

 

So, after all that, I still want to say, the fact that the protagonist has a name that looks East Asian and the antagonist has an appearance that looks East Asian, not to mention that the leaked game synopsis appears to be about a civil war taking place in the Himalayas and not involving white people at all, is a remarkable step forward, even if Far Cry 4 completely fails in execution. I can't be more excited that a AAA game doesn't need a white face front and center to give people a reason to invest in its story. There can and will be other missteps, because that's how the world works, but the promise, as it appears right now, is great. My only wish is that they could have come up with box art that reflected rather than sensationalized that promise, but games are a business first and foremost, at least for Ubisoft, and I won't yet let my negative reaction toward the art outweigh my tentative interest in playing an East Asian dealing with other East Asians about East Asian problems, rather than another incarnation of Jason Brody's Wild Safari Cruise With Machine Guns. That's all I have to say about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nepali protagonist would be a pretty great change of pace. I would actually have liked a pulpy narrative of taking down some white guy who has set up his personal colony. I guess Western symbols can make that point as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess you either have a white protagonist dressed down as an asshole for every insensitive blunder, or… a power fantasy with an ethnic protagonist. Attempting to touch on any serious cultural or geopolitical issues using the verbs "shoot" and "run" is probably a hiding to nothing.

 

Highly developed FPS mechanics tuned for fun, plus social issue, is hardly Escape from Woomera. Interviews with the writer of Far Cry 3 were embarrassing, I have zero confidence Far Cry 4 won't be as cringeworthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now