MS halted "darker" Fable Racism?

If this has been posted then my apologies:

Thoughts on this? Also there was this article stating MS did not want a black woman on the front cover of Fable 3:

Nonsense from a former employee upset his employment was terminated, or genuine MS inability to move with the times?

I think it’s more of a marketing point of view. The MS dude probably was more interested in the loss of money than being innovative and wanting to break down barriers. A lot of studios until recently have been scared to put females, let alone different skin colored females as main protagonists because people might reject it. I remember when Remember Me flopped people were upset that Ubisoft would get the wrong idea and never put another female black protagonist in the front of their games again.

It’s stupid but am sure when 8 year olds look into a game they probably look at the box art and see the cool buff macho man and buy it instead of the game with the female in front.

I don’t see how putting a black women in the fornt cover would be racist. If anything that would be the opposite.

If anything I’d more or less just blame the target audience. But I think the employee more or less mistrusted their judgement.

MS is branching out into the racing sport?

The guy was saying he “wanted” to have a black woman on the cover but MS were strongly opposed to the idea and halted it indefinitely.

So instead of approaching it differently he wrote that article to make MS look like a bunch of racists?

Or am I reading all of this the wrong way?

Is it not racist to want a white guy on the cover but dismiss the idea of a black lady? They said to the guy “what is the weakest selling Disney film” and he said he didn’t know they answered with “the princess and the frog, work it out”

Clearly if what he’s saying is true there were racist connotations

Nope it isn’t racist to have a white person on the cover at all.

I was just wondering if I was misunderstanding this.

Reading this, to me it appears like the Microsoft Games marketing guys know that putting a black woman on the cover would sell worse than putting a white man on, which means the game will sell worse and NOT because they are racists. As mentioned, they worry more about the money than breaking down walls.

So no, they aren’t racists for not wanting a black woman on the cover… they are just accepting that people won’t buy the game for having a black woman on the cover.

Question is… is that really the case? Are games more successful by having a white male protagonist on the cover? Would the game really sell worse with a black woman on the cover?

If the answer to those are “yes”, then from a marketing’s point of view, as someone who wants the game to sell well, I can understand that decision. Of course the marketing department want the game to sell well, so they go with what they know will sell well, and in this case, it is having a white male protagonist on the cover.

The reason behind it though… it’s bad. Really bad. Because it means that gamers won’t buy a game for both racist and misogynist reasons. If gamers would turn down a game because it has a black woman on the cover, then yes, they are racist and misogynist.

Of course the marketing guys could indeed be racist and misogynist as well… Just saying, it’s not that black and white. (pun intended)


The videogame world has become a strange zoo comprised by SJW developers, LGBT journalists, Tumblr feminists, old white dudes in CEO positions, kids doxxing devs, offended people making journalists to quit…

You don’t even know what to think anymore. You don’t really know who is racist, who is a SJW, who is doing it for the $$$, who is really campaigning for the minorities…

My general feeling is that there’s two types of developers, the ones campaigning for social justice (these are the ones trying to insert racial diversity and desexualization into their games, covers, designs and such) who can get a bit ridiculous at times, and vary between the well intentioned and the cringe worthy and the ones who are just trying to navigate the hordes of offended people and just want to ship their game.

In both cases, these two types of developers end up colliding with the marketing departments. And marketing says “diversity does not sell. Put white dude with guns in cover, there’s millions of dollars at stake. Play safe”

From there, some developers get mad at them, others don’t care, and others are happy to toss aside their beliefs when it’s time to ship the game. The levels of hipocrisy in the SJW scene are too damn high.

There’s way too much people complaining about the lack of racial and sexual diversity in games. Most of these people don’t really care about it, it’s just a way to feel better about themselves. They couldn’t care less about gay characters in videogames. Sometimes it’s just a way of going with the masses without being crucified.

1 Like

This is me. I just stay the hell away from all of it.

1 Like

My only problem with SJW’s is what they do to achieve there goals and of course the hypocrisy.

They claim they want to stand up for the people of when it comes to color, orientation or gender. Yet we hear these people committing the exact same act that they try to stop.
example. they would bash someone who was proud of being straight, white and male and they attack that individual even when they are not discriminating against anyone there.

Good idea.


I’m not convinced by the “we won’t put a black person on the cover because it doesn’t sell” angle. There have been plenty of games where a black person is prevalent on the front cover and sold very well indeed (Crackdown comes to mind)

The lines between business decision and racism are blurred at this point, I’m not convinced it’s all about marketing. For instance why not show the white guy and a black woman and maybe a hispanic character on the cover to show diversity and that the player can create or become anyone they wish?

The point is not that a white guy is on the cover, rather it’s that they dismissed the idea of a black person because they felt it wouldn’t sell. A point i would argue is factually incorrect given the amount of video games with a black hero that sold very well

Upper management wants to sell many copies of their game. Lately they have realized that not only gays and minorities want to be represented, but also that these kind of people spend much money in gay friendly items and support inclusive products with mouth to ear avertisement and in social media. Gays are the best PR to advertise in their communities.

Also If you market your game as gay friendly and inclusive of minorities, there’s a huge portion of white cis people campaigning for it and willing to support these type of products.

Now you have the support of gays, minorities, and SJW. But what do you do to not lose the support of the rest of the gamers, who either don’t care about social justice, are against it, or just want to play?

You let them win in the last feuds they have: The white cis protagonist and the cover of the game. That way you keep mostly everybody happy. There’s a small parcel of diverse characters while the main game is mostly your typical power fantasy.

Some people call this tokenism. But the result of the back and forths between game designers, execs, marketers, and gamers, mostly has resulted in this.

Yeah you do make a good point when ya pt it that way. So race may mot have had anything to do with it, it could of had to do with he gender but I don’t know if that has anything to do with it either. I say this because we’ve had games were women were on the cover of a game and it sold well to.

Can you even change skin color in Fable? I hardly remember Fable 3 back when I played it. Don’t remember playing as someone with my skin color. Think I just went with the regular dude.