"Ethics and Journalistic Integrity"

[Gaizokubanou]

There's also a difference between a story that is clearly focused on a specific culture or place, and one that is generic fantasy fare created for a global audience (which is what the Witcher is now, regardless of pedigree). 

 

This is interesting cause despite Witcher series' (Video game) obvious aim at global market, I always saw it as something very foreign as both Korean and American simply because of the development team being so geographically focused.  Same with Metro series for example.

 

They may tell a fairly 'generic' story in a sense (Witcher is not too far off from all other grim-dark tolkien clones, Metro games didn't really deviate much from any other shooters), but I never get this sense that devs that are that region focused 'owed' it to me or others to represent me or others.

To show contrast to this would be Ubisoft's reluctance to include playable women in AC Unity... that I see as an ethical failing.

 

I just don't understand why asking for More Than White People in a fucking video game always leads to these long pointless arguments where people try to defend lack of representation.

 

Nobody's accusing CD Projekt of being intentionally racist. It's obviously just not something they thought about. I thought the article Mangela linked earlier was pretty fuckin' spot-on as far as explaining what happened, and it sounds entirely reasonable. (Here it is again, since it seems like some people here didn't even bother reading it: http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/2015/06/04/witcher-3-and-diversity/)

 

I just don't fucking get it. Nothing is immune to criticism. Likewise, criticism doesn't automatically mean the subject of criticism is the worst thing in human history.

 

Without criticism, nothing will ever change. You people understand that, right?

 

The only reason gay romance existed in Mass Effect 2 after not existing in Mass Effect 1 is because people spoke up about it. Anyone else remember that whole kerfuffle? It was ridiculous the amount of people who fought against it, but Bioware listened, and rightly addressed the issues in future games. Their romance stuff has only improved with every iteration, and while still not perfect, is better than most. Because they listen to, what's that word again? Criticism!

 

Because nobody here is arguing that CD Projekt deserves to be praised or anything of the sort.  Everyone here seems to agree that at the very least, it is a clear missed opportunity as better representation would have been for the better.

 

The difference that me and few others are trying to raise is whether they had moral obligation to do so.  I think not, for the same reason I don't call foul to every Kdrama for being purely korean (in modern korea setting of course, where you would think there is even less of a reason to be so korean in today's global economy!!! (despite ease of tourism, inter-racial mingling of any sort is still extremely rare for most koreans in korea)), or call bolleywood "ignorant" (that's what that article accuses CD Projekt of, ignorance) because it is so predominantly indian...  The racial melting pot of USA or VC is both amazing and erasure of that through omission would be a gross ethical misconduct, but otherwise in mostly homogeneous nations around the world, I wouldn't blame them for not doing their full diligence in regards to better representation regardless of their skin color.

 

I'm all for asking/suggesting to CDProjekt for better representation for their future games.  I just don't think they were 'ignorant' and did something wrong for not doing so is all.

[Twig]

The difference that me and few others are trying to raise is whether they had moral obligation to do so.

But that doesn't even matter. At all. Who fucking cares.

 

This is criticism. People here are actively arguing against criticism, like they shouldn't be criticized, and that's dumb. You yourself are still doing it, despite claiming not to. "Oh but what if a Korean drama only had Korean people." This isn't a Korean drama, this is a fantasy world where anything could happen. You've also brought up how it's all Polish mythology and yadda yadda, which indicates you didn't actually read that article, written by a Polish person, pointing out that there isn't really any such thing as Polish mythology, and it's largely made up.

 

What you're doing is largely a silencing tactic. Whether intentional or not. You're being dismissive of the complaints that people have. The legitimate complaints. Your reasoning is logically sound, I guess, but it's a reasoning that ignores the larger picture. Stop focusing on the so-called cultural heritage of a fucking fantasy book with dwarves (decidedly not Polish in origin). It's a waste of time.

 

I repeat: change doesn't happen without talking about it first.

 

And another thing! Ignorance isn't a sin. Willful ignorance is. Saying they are ignorant is not an insult. But if they intentionally and willfully ignore these kinds of criticism, that is where the problem lies. It remains to be seen whether or not they will.

[Mangela Lansbury]

This is not quite right. Japan was actively colonizing the surrounding area from the late 1800s in a way that was undeniably cultural imperialism, occupying places like Taiwan and Korea, treating the natives as primitives, and trying to "civilize" them. It got much worse the 1940s within Japan, but imperialism outside Japan was a pretty fundamental aspect of Meiji and beyond, not a brief aberration. From more or less the moment Japan became something we would understand as a modern nation state, it was practicing the cultural imperialism associated with the major modern nation states of its era.

Additionally (not related to your post, but related to this discussion), the degree to which Japan was isolated from the world during its "closed nation" period (and also before then, obviously) is itself something of a cultural myth, precisely analogous to the way games like Witcher and other works of fantasy pulp portray a cultural myth of white homogeneity in Europe. The frequency and nature of the relationship between Japan and the continent shifted based on their respective political situations, but basically any aspect of Japan known via recorded history is necessarily a record of Japan after it has been transformed by substantial cultural exchange with people living in places now known as Korea and China. (Because the earliest extant Japanese myth-histories are written with Chinese characters and modeled after Chinese histories.)

I'm making my public education proud, one dumb comment at a time.

[Gaizokubanou]

But that doesn't even matter. At all. Who fucking cares.

 

I FUCKING CARE TWIG.  I DO.

 

 

You've also brought up how it's all Polish mythology and yadda yadda, which indicates you didn't actually read that article, written by a Polish person, pointing out that there isn't really any such thing as Polish mythology, and it's largely made up.

 

Except that I haven't.  I said that the production was of polish culture.  They made generic grim-dark tolkien clone in the end, sure (the post you got my quote from, I said this exact same thing already...).  But was done through whatever lense of perspective they had.

 

What you're doing is largely a silencing tactic. Whether intentional or not. You're being dismissive of the complaints that people have. The legitimate complaints. Your reasoning is logically sound, I guess, but it's a reasoning that ignores the larger picture. Stop focusing on the so-called cultural heritage of a fucking fantasy book with dwarves (decidedly not Polish in origin). It's a waste of time.

 

You know what, I put up with your snark ass shit all the time cause most of the time it's just funny and whatnot but your willfull disregard of my actual posts for you to pigeon hole my views is getting gross man.  Stop it please.  Actually address what I wrote instead of what you think I wrote.

 

When my post included this

 

 

I'm all for asking/suggesting to CDProjekt for better representation for their future games.  I just don't think they were 'ignorant' and did something wrong for not doing so is all.

 

only for you to accuse me of using "silencing tactics" to stop people from asking for more diverse games from CD Projekt is ludicrous.  I explicitly posted that I'm for asking for these changes.  It cannot get any clearer.

[Twig]

You're right, I was confusing you with someone else, re: Polish mythology. Your arguments are very similar, so I conflated your posts. Sorry about that. That was my mistake.

 

But I stand by what I said, re: silencing. I believe that it's not intentional (which is where my "whether intentional or not" bit came from), but you're obfuscating the issue with unnecessary statements. A Korean drama doesn't matter, because it's so far removed from this issue as to be meaningless to the argument. Same for Bollywood. No relevance whatsoever. These things just get in the way, make the argument so complicated and so far away from what it actually is so that it all fades away into nothingness.

 

This isn't a contemporary, realistic setting. This is a completely fictional world with magic and dragons and what have you. The only excuse is ignorance (again, not a sin, unless it's willful), but then you claim they aren't ignorant. So what is it? Why is it all white? And for that matter, why does it even matter why it's all white? All that matters is it is.

 

EDIT: Ah, I found where I got your Polish mythology thing from.

 

Then there is what I Saw Dasein said about this game being product of Poland.  Let's just replace Poland with Korea.  There is Korean book based on Korean mythology, and Korean devs make a game based on that book with exclusively Korean cast... stuff like that is generated in korea quite frequently (and judging by how often Japan becomes center of the world in few japanese fictions I read, similar with china, USA, etc, I gather this is bit of a norm) so Witcher 3 just doesn't feel like the best example of this white washing problem (which I think is both real but kinda mis-evaluated at the same time) because of its very specific national/cultural identity.

It's true that you don't explicitly say this game represents Polish mythology, etc. But then you compare it to a Korean book that does. You can see why I'd be confused, yes? You're comparing a book that represents Korean mythology (a thing which, as far as I know, can be confirmed through preserved history) to this video game which doesn't, for the most part, represent Polish mythology (as far as we all know! maybe there's some crazy coincidence and it perfectly represents Polish mythology! wouldn't that be a laugh, and we'd never even know it).

[Bjorn]

This is interesting cause despite Witcher series' (video game) obvious aim at global market, I always saw it as something very foreign as both Korean and American simply because of the development team being so geographically focused.  Same with Metro series for example.

 

I've played Metro 2033 and about half of Last Light.  I've only played about half of Witcher 2, and I started Witcher 1, but didn't get very far.  I've by and large avoided direct commentary on the Witcher series, and tried to focus more on how it's fine for others to criticize it because there are other people way more familiar with the series than me.

 

That said, the Metro series oozes former Soviet Union out of every pore.  I don't think that game works the way it does if it isn't set in the context of Moscow.  The tone and the attitude are something you only find in Russian/Ukrainian fiction.  My time with the Witcher never really indicated to me that it is coming from any particular cultural heritage.  If I didn't know it was a Polish developer, I don't feel like I would be able to tell you at all where it was developed.  I'm also not nearly as familiar with Polish/Slavic culture, so I'm not even sure what I'd be looking for.  I've hung out with a fair number of Russian and Ukrainian folks in Kansas City over the years (used to work with several guys who ended up introducing me to their larger community), and I think that has given me an interest and appreciation of certain elements of their culture I wouldn't otherwise have. 

[Gaizokubanou]

You're right, I was confusing you with someone else, re: Polish mythology. Your arguments are very similar, so I conflated your posts. Sorry about that. That was my mistake.

 

But I stand by what I said, re: silencing. I believe that it's not intentional (which is where my "whether intentional or not" bit came from), but you're obfuscating the issue with unnecessary statements. A Korean drama doesn't matter, because it's so far removed from this issue as to be meaningless to the argument. Same for Bollywood. No relevance whatsoever. These things just get in the way, make the argument so complicated and so far away from what it actually is so that it all fades away into nothingness.

 

This isn't a contemporary, realistic setting. This is a completely fictional world with magic and dragons and what have you. The only excuse is ignorance (again, not a sin, unless it's willful), but then you claim they aren't ignorant. So what is it? Why is it all white? And for that matter, why does it even matter why it's all white? All that matters is it is.

 

EDIT: Ah, I found where I got your Polish mythology thing from.

 

 

It's true that you don't explicitly say this game represents Polish mythology, etc. But then you compare it to a Korean book that does. You can see why I'd be confused, yes? You're comparing a book that represents Korean mythology (a thing which, as far as I know, can be confirmed through preserved history) to this video game which doesn't, for the most part, represent Polish mythology (as far as we all know! maybe there's some crazy coincidence and it perfectly represents Polish mythology! wouldn't that be a laugh, and we'd never even know it).

 

Yeah my initial posts weren't clearly the most well thought out (as I interacted in this discussion my views got more formed).

 

But on the topic of unintentional silencing, I am making these points because I think the only reason Witcher 3 got highlighted for this absence of diversity is because Poland happens to be predominantly white country today, so they made exclusively white (human wise) game which coincides with white-washing of places like USA where the diversity is much more prevalent (so absence of other skin tone has different meaning).  That's why I keep referencing Korea or Bolleywood or whatnot... to demonstrate that we take no issue with absence of diversity when local production team makes something that reflects on their local scene... just because that local scene is predominantly white, I don't think they need to bear the failings of industries with more diverse background (like USA).

 

I think both the origin of production and end product absolutely matters when measuring ethical responsibility of the creators.  Like I wouldn't excuse any production, bolleywood, kdramas or anime if they depicted modern day Manhattan life as one of exclusively white experience, and same goes for CD Projekt Red.  But if Bolleywood, Kdrama or Anime created purely fictional setting and they failed to include any other human race other than indian/korean/japanese, it would have been a missed opportunity for better work but not an ethical failing on their end.  And I'm just extending that same thought to CD Projekt Red because its geographical origin is where population is so overwhelmingly uniform (if I'm factually wrong on this then well I would concede this point completely of course).  But if VC (suppose to be most diverse city in the world) based studio did something like Witcher 3, then I would find that highly troublesome and unethical of them to do so.

 

I think ignorance is too strong.  Whenever someone chooses to create a fiction, obviously they are ignoring 99.99999% of reality because our minds can only hold so little about the realities of the world.  And so to me, the word ignorance means absence of knowledge and understanding that you are expected to have given your life and capabilities, otherwise we are all infinitely ignorant and the word has no meaning.  So given that, when people from very homogeneous nations create works that are very homogeneous, I don't find that to be ignorant because that's just what their life experience is.

 

That said, the Metro series oozes former Soviet Union out of every pore.  I don't think that game works the way it does if it isn't set in the context of Moscow.  The tone and the attitude are something you only find in Russian/Ukrainian fiction.  My time with the Witcher never really indicated to me that it is coming from any particular cultural heritage.  If I didn't know it was a Polish developer, I don't feel like I would be able to tell you at all where it was developed.  I'm also not nearly as familiar with Polish/Slavic culture, so I'm not even sure what I'd be looking for.  I've hung out with a fair number of Russian and Ukrainian folks in Kansas City over the years (used to work with several guys who ended up introducing me to their larger community), and I think that has given me an interest and appreciation of certain elements of their culture I wouldn't otherwise have. 

 

Hmm perhaps you are right that the tone and setting of Metro is way more Soviet Union than I realized (was too focused on mechanical aspects).  And same with me on Polish/Slavic, like IDK what to look for so maybe Witcher 3 is indeed way more blend than say, Metro was.

[Twig]

But The Witcher 3 doesn't reflect Poland's "local scene", in terms of culture or tone. It reflects Lord of the Rings or Dragon Age or any other generic fantasy thing, except probably a little more mopey and angry in tone. Maybe that's Polish?!

 

The only way that it reflects Poland is in its all-whiteness, which, in this day and age of the internet, something they are obviously aware of, that's not really an excuse. It screams of ignorance. And ignorance is bad, but it, ugh, I'm repeating myself again, isn't a sin, unless it's willful. I don't believe it is willful in this case. But it is what it is, eh. Bollywood and K-dramas aren't relevaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaant because Bollywood and K-dramas aren't a generic dragon-filled fantasyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy. (Actually I'm sure Bollywood produces some crazy stuff because I've seen some videos, but all the videos I've seen still take place in India, which is not something The Witcher can say about Poland.)

 

Nobody [here] is accusing them of being "unethical", as far as I can tell. Nor has anything I've read elsewhere, although I definitely believe some people would accuse them suchly.

 

If suchly isn't a word (it's not, unless I'm crazy), it should be.

[Gaizokubanou]

Yoo I edited response about ignorance while you posted that~

 

Nobody [here] is accusing them of being "unethical",

 

If so, then I was clearly mistaken and wasn't really arguing with anyone on any ground!  Maybe that is all I ever posted were~

 

About kdrama yes kdramas are much more grounded than Witcher 3 is for sure, but I meant just anything korean produced, most of which exclusively deals with Koreans in whatever fictional world.

[Twig]

Everyone is ignorant about a lot of things. I certainly am. But I try to fill that void with knowledge. Certainly, if you talked to me ten years ago, I never would've thought racism actually still existed in our world, because I had never seen it happen. But now, I recognize a lot of things that happened ten years ago and more than ten years ago as actual racism. I was ignorant ten years ago. I'm less ignorant today.

 

Ignorance is simply a lack of knowledge. It can be harmful, but one can't be held responsible unless one intentionally ignores their ignorance and pretends they know everything.

 

Just as bad, possibly worse, I suppose, is when that ignorance becomes knowledge, and you willfully use that knowledge to hurt other people. Obviously CD Projekt is not doing this. Well, at least, I hope so! That would certainly ruin my day if I discovered they were!

[Apple Cider]

Why are we leaning on PoC cultures as counterpoint examples when talking about a culture that wants to present itself as homogenously white when it's not? Or that White Culture From Europe is what has sort of dominated the world since the time of imperialism/colonialism and those are two very different things? Say we didn't talk about Witcher 3 since that's what people seem to be getting hung up on - why are so many video games made by Americans (which is not a white-only country, which Poland isn't either, but I digress) all white people?

[Christopher]

Even if you accept the "it's based on Polish history" example, there is just no defense of the exclusion all non-white characters in Witcher.

 

For a really well known example of a work of european fantasy that includes at least some diverse characters because it's influenced by history history and not white supremacist myth history, just look at the Song of Ice and Fire books (much less so the Game of Thrones tv show). Yes, the continent is largely white, but the book also recognizes the fact that people can and do (did) travel across borders. The history and present day politics of the land is strongly informed by immigration across borders, and larger cities are places where you can meet people from other cultures/races. If Witcher was similarly informed by history history and not a magical racial purity bubble history, it could have done this as well

 

George R R Martin's inclusion of people from outside cultures doesn't ruin the text's ostensible links to its historical inspirations. It paints a better picture of the world, and it shows a much stronger knowlege of history than pulp garbage like Witcher. (Linking this to some tangential topics coming up here, the landmasses that we now know of as Korea and Japan similarly did not live in a racial purity bubble either.)

 

You can create a racial purity bubble when you tell your myths, but it's a conscious choice, not something that can be justified with a claim to historical accuracy. It's a retroactive revision of history based on national borders in the modern world, not related at all to actual history, which is much more complicated.

 

It doesn't mean that every kind of work needs every ethnic and racial group in the world, but once you start creating work for a global audience, you are open for criticism from that audience. You can reject that criticism or not, but it's valid criticism.

[Gaizokubanou]

Why are we leaning on PoC cultures as counterpoint examples when talking about a culture that wants to present itself as homogenously white when it's not? Or that White Culture From Europe is what has sort of dominated the world since the time of imperialism/colonialism and those are two very different things? Say we didn't talk about Witcher 3 since that's what people seem to be getting hung up on - why are so many video games made by Americans (which is not a white-only country, which Poland isn't either, but I digress) all white people?

 

If I had to take a guess, probably cause the industry is way too white-male occupied, with lot of creators just continue to chime in their view points and desires.  A guess though, cause as Korean-American male, I'm leaning toward Indian woman protagonist in my work (but purely for look and a call sign nickname, race is otherwise irrelevant for this work) so I don't quite understand the desire to recreate their own desires in the most basic form.

[syntheticgerbil]

I just don't understand why asking for More Than White People in a fucking video game always leads to these long pointless arguments where people try to defend lack of representation.

...

I just don't fucking get it. Nothing is immune to criticism. Likewise, criticism doesn't automatically mean the subject of criticism is the worst thing in human history.

 

Of course, Twig, no one thinks anyone is immune to criticism but we have to use these strawman arguments to show that some here are more self righteous than others? No one here also says nothing should change. I don't know what forums some of you guys think you are in. Some people just aren't going to agree with you and you don't have to demonize them. Ergh, I give up, carry on. It's such a chore to even talk here anymore.

 

It was actually me who linked to the article, but you did do the bulk of the yelling.  I didn't say much because I felt the article pretty much nailed everything worth saying.

Maybe one day I can be as cool as you Bjorn. Maybe.

[itsamoose]

But that doesn't even matter. At all. Who fucking cares.

 

This is criticism. People here are actively arguing against criticism, like they shouldn't be criticized, and that's dumb. You yourself are still doing it, despite claiming not to. "Oh but what if a Korean drama only had Korean people." This isn't a Korean drama, this is a fantasy world where anything could happen. You've also brought up how it's all Polish mythology and yadda yadda, which indicates you didn't actually read that article, written by a Polish person, pointing out that there isn't really any such thing as Polish mythology, and it's largely made up.

 

What you're doing is largely a silencing tactic. Whether intentional or not. You're being dismissive of the complaints that people have. The legitimate complaints. Your reasoning is logically sound, I guess, but it's a reasoning that ignores the larger picture. Stop focusing on the so-called cultural heritage of a fucking fantasy book with dwarves (decidedly not Polish in origin). It's a waste of time.

 

I repeat: change doesn't happen without talking about it first.

 

And another thing! Ignorance isn't a sin. Willful ignorance is. Saying they are ignorant is not an insult. But if they intentionally and willfully ignore these kinds of criticism, that is where the problem lies. It remains to be seen whether or not they will.

 

For me the question isn't so much why does criticism exist, but rather why do certain criticisms exist?  Or in other words, why aren't people criticizing some other aspect of the game?  As a corollary to that, what could be done to address the criticism?  Additionally, why is the criticism levied at individual aspects of the game and not at some of it's deeper assumptions?  For example in games with black characters, racism is rarely ever encountered, particularly the kind of subtle racism all too familiar today, why?. Why are significant relationships in games typically limited to romance options, and why is sex always the ultimate culmination of this relationship?  Sure criticism needs to exist, but I also think that just pointing out that a certain thing wasn't done isn't really helpful beyond recognition.  I don't know of any places, save this forum, where these kinds of criticisms are levied or discussed in any detail.

 

Now certainly this isn't the doing of a single person, and I don't know that there is necessarily a single reason you can point to as an explanation for why a particular criticism is popular.  However when the criticism is simply "there aren't any black characters in the game" that will end up getting addressed by the studio as adding in a black character.  It doesn't mean the developers will attempt to tackle any of the difficult issues of race, gender, identity, etc and often don't because including that one character makes the criticism go away.  It doesn't mean a typically underrepresented character will take a larger role in the story or have more production time devoted to them.  To me this kind of criticism is complaining about features, not criticizing the substance of the game.

[syntheticgerbil]

Oh god, itsamoose, that's everything I feel like is going on with none of my inability to form coherent thoughts into words. Thank you.

[Twig]

Or in other words, why aren't people criticizing some other aspect of the game?

Because this is the fight some people have chosen.

 

This is disturbingly similar to an argument I had at work the other day where someone questioned the legitimacy of #BlackLivesMatter because, obviously, "All lives matter!" Well, yes, that's true, but...?????

 

Change, unfortunately (in this case), is a slow process. There's no switch that's going to be flipped overnight and all of a sudden everything's okay. Any progress is still progress.

[itsamoose]

It wasn't my intention to try to equivocate, rather to question why more fundamental assumptions of game design/story design don't get criticized the way surface level elements do.  To go back to the relationship example, the complaints are often that there aren't enough types of romantic relationships in a game. Simply through the sheer amount of work involved, many games view romantic relationships as the greatest kind of relationship, or at least those worth the greatest amount of your time.  Furthermore, it doesn't seem to value dating around, and generally encourages a single monogamous relationship.  This complaint doesn't question whether or not these assumptions are valid, and instead accepts those assumptions.

[Twig]

And that's a problem worth talking about, too!

 

I think addressing surface level problems is just as important, to be honest. If The Witcher had as many people of color as it did white people (or more, since an equal number of all races would make white people the minority, but we gotta start somewhere), that alone would make a lot of people feel less... absent from the game. The majority of the world, in fact, assuming everyone in the world played the game. From there, you can ask other questions, like why do no black people have important roles, or why are all the black people criminals, or whatever problems might exist. Yes, you could've asked something like that to begin with, but change happens slowly. I dunno, I got nothin' else. I just know I've heard from people of color in real life whom I've talked to that even the mere presence of a person of their race feels like a huge step in the right direction. And it's such an incredibly easy step to take!

[Gormongous]

For me the question isn't so much why does criticism exist, but rather why do certain criticisms exist?  Or in other words, why aren't people criticizing some other aspect of the game?  As a corollary to that, what could be done to address the criticism?  Additionally, why is the criticism levied at individual aspects of the game and not at some of it's deeper assumptions?  For example in games with black characters, racism is rarely ever encountered, particularly the kind of subtle racism all too familiar today, why?. Why are significant relationships in games typically limited to romance options, and why is sex always the ultimate culmination of this relationship?  Sure criticism needs to exist, but I also think that just pointing out that a certain thing wasn't done isn't really helpful beyond recognition.  I don't know of any places, save this forum, where these kinds of criticisms are levied or discussed in any detail.

 

I mean, at the end of the day, people have limited attention to spend, even on the things about which they deeply care. As a medieval historian, especially one who is active while Game of Thrones is in the popular consciousness, I care deeply about applying methods of social justice to neo-medieval settings to challenge popular stereotypes about my field of study, so here I am in this thread critiquing the politics of a game that I rather like, otherwise. It's a well-worn fact that public awareness of history, if not the entirety of humanities, is about fifty years behind current research, so putting critical pressure on fantasy works to question their assumption of racial and sexual dynamics in the actual Middle Ages feels to me like a good way of getting ahead of that curve.

 

I feel like The Witcher 3 captures a fair slice of the moral universe within which medieval people existed and moved (although, as always, with kinship groupings powerless to stop the rape that's inexplicably everywhere and the Church a corrupt and broken institution that ends up doing net harm to everyone else) but falls short in other places, especially the broader social and political landscape. Asking for what purpose do Andrzej Sapkowski and CD Projekt Red focus on incredibly deep and complex situations in individual stories or quests, while populating a landscape mostly denuded of obviously "foreign" peoples and any political intricacies beyond "northern kingdoms vs. southern empire," is an important part of examining what role fantasy works have in our culture, beyond unconsciously white supremacist nostalgia,*** and what roles they can have, in terms of educating and habituating people to norms of the distant past.

 

 

 

*** I can't emphasize "unconsciously" enough, because no one reads Lord of the Rings and then starts leaving burning crosses around, but it does leave its readers with the distinct impression that "white vs. black, brown, and other colors" has been a historical reality reaching so far back that it's rightfully ubiquitous in our fictionalized imaginings of the past. There's definitely shades of "Epic Pooh" in that, too, and the fact that that's an essay from 1978 reminds me of just how long commentators of speculative fiction have been criticizing neo-medievalist fantasy as conservative bourgeois fairy tales and "just so" stories without the least bit of mainstream response.

[Vainamoinen]

I...

 

 

...what have I kicked off here...

[itsamoose]

I...

 

 

...what have I kicked off here...

 

Exactly the kind of discussion that needs to be taking place in games.  I believe our society today, not just in games, gets obsessed with trying to do things better but only within a framework of the way things are currently done.  While I generally agree with these kinds of criticisms, too often they are seen as substitutes for going deeper rather than the jumping off point they should be.

 

Take the Witcher 3 complaint as an example.  Let's say about 25% of the game's characters were people of color, equally sprinkled throughout the game.  This wouldn't guarantee the game addressed issues of class, community, group dynamics, xenophobia, intolerance, and all the other good and bad things that are a product of the world itself being diverse.  It wouldn't turn companion characters from a rogue's gallery into a family unit of sorts, it wouldn't prevent characters from being defined (as far as the player is concerned) by a single personality trait or past happening.  The player in all likelihood would still be able to effectively make decisions for people having to do with deeply personal moments of their lives.  After all (Dragon Age Inquisition spoiler about Iron Bull)

 

What right do I have to determine if Iron bull's commitment to his society is greater than his commitment to his company?

 

For as far as games have come in recent years in representing people of different groups, they are all still ultimately my plaything to do with what I wish, for whatever reason.  This may be callous of me to say, but to the criticism that there aren't enough groups of people represented in a game the solution is always the same--represent more groups of people.  On the surface the solution is simple, though the success of it is up to the individual and prone to variations-on-a-theme style creation.  Basically one team finds out what works, or what is acceptable, and that is copied over and over again.  Ultimately I think this is people getting fired up about an issue that, while important, is a product of the deeper assumptions of game design not having been questioned.

[Mangela Lansbury]

For as far as games have come in recent years in representing people of different groups, they are all still ultimately my plaything to do with what I wish, for whatever reason. This may be callous of me to say, but to the criticism that there aren't enough groups of people represented in a game the solution is always the same--represent more groups of people. On the surface the solution is simple, though the success of it is up to the individual and prone to variations-on-a-theme style creation. Basically one team finds out what works, or what is acceptable, and that is copied over and over again. Ultimately I think this is people getting fired up about an issue that, while important, is a product of the deeper assumptions of game design not having been questioned.

You can't really have a nuanced, in depth problem with how people are represented if their representation is as rare as it is. Getting representation is the first step. Then we can move on to improving that representation (which is really just a matter of getting better stories told, something all games need). Progress is made in steps.

[itsamoose]

You can't really have a nuanced, in depth problem with how people are represented if their representation is as rare as it is. Getting representation is the first step. Then we can move on to improving that representation (which is really just a matter of getting better stories told, something all games need). Progress is made in steps.

 

I'm sorry, but that seems like a cop out to me.  Ghandi's marches were not a step toward civil liberties, they were a radical change in the way people protest their governments.  The ending of segregation in the US was not a step, it was a radical restructuring of society and government.  The iPhone was not a step in mobile device development, it was a radical change in the way everything on a mobile device works from the marketplace to input.  Gunpower weapons were not a step in the way wars were conducted, it completely changed them.  The internet was not a step in the way people communicate, it has and will continue to radically change the way society functions.  Through the lens of history it seems as though progress was made in steps, but at the time those steps are actually radical change away from the status quo.

[Twig]

You can't really have a nuanced, in depth problem with how people are represented if their representation is as rare as it is. Getting representation is the first step. Then we can move on to improving that representation (which is really just a matter of getting better stories told, something all games need). Progress is made in steps.

Yeah, exactly!