Please don't cater to SJRs (aka SJWs)

Off-Topic
81

there’s something else you have to understand: in the last 20 years, gaming has expanded not only their audiences, but also widenend the origin and social status of their developers.

Nowadays, every studio has developers who are LGBT, from racial minorities and from diferent religions.
It’s not like you may “offend” the SJW gamers. It’s that probably you may offend one of your own developers.

How are you going to be designing a character with massive jugs when your software engineer is a feminist female? That character is not going to be approved by the designer’s team. How are you going to tell your 3D artist to create “big ■■■■■ and tessellated nipples” with a straight face?

That’s where the first batch of self censorship starts: Inside the studio itself.

Now, everybody has to swallow hard pills in the name of marketability and game sales. I agree sometimes people overreacts. But in the end everybody has to make a compromise.

82

Would anyone agree that the retro Tusk should still have the animal loincloth and not a safe pair of pants?
Surely they wont place any shirt on the retro bare chest build???

at least there arent two Versions of tusk, and i hope they wont spare the chance of skin on the default
Say a chris redfield with a tank or rolled up sleeves
Or an adon wrapped foot and hands training gear

just serious requests with a bit of humor in such a heavily serious thread

83

The butthurt is strong in this one.

Yeess. Yeeeeeessssss, let the butthurt flow through you.

84

I definitely want his retro to keep the barbarian/Conan type look. Maybe covered in tribal war paint or tattoos + stuff.

In light of everything that’s gone on in this thread maybe his main outfit should be a banana hammock, + he should slap his butt every time instinct activates. It’s what the people want. :grin:

4 Likes
85

I can tell you with certainty two things:

  1. If they give Tusk a shirt and pants people will complain.

  2. None* of those complaints will be from women complaining that Tusk is less sexy and they should have kept him “true to the original.”

*Maybe not absolutely zero, but a statistically insignificant portion.

1 Like
86

Great points here, @Filemoncio. I’d extend what you’re saying even further though. What some seem to view as the collective bunching of our society’s undies, others view as an overall evolution of our culture, which is as predictable and as constant as it’s ever been.

I tend to think that the Internet has played a large role in that evolution over the last 20+ years, as we get more news, more direct communication and see as close as we’ve ever seen, people that come from different backgrounds, different cultures and subcultures, live and love differently than what’s typically been considered societal norms.

All that is an overly wordy way of saying the more people are introduced to others and their circumstances, the more their likely to evolve their own opinions.

So I don’t think it’s just a matter of saying “maybe we shouldn’t objectify women in our game” because there are more female gamers then there were 20 years ago or even because there might be more women and/or feminists on the dev team than there were 20 years ago.

If anything, I think it’s more of a general awareness among people of all ages, all genders, all races, etc that objectification, either of women or of racial or of homosexual stereotypes is kind of a garbage thing to do to those people who can and often are marginalized in society for various reasons to begin with.

Not only that, but games themselves are evolving as well, especially from both a story and a character design perspective. Mass Effect’s story likely wouldn’t exist 20 or 30 years ago, just as a game can’t pass by (unironically) with a core plot that ninjas kidnapped the president in today’s gaming landscape.

So while there might be some self-censoring or responding to public feedback (or outcry if one prefers), I’d wager a vast majority of the changes to the video game landscape are just a result of the medium’s natural (societal) evolution, and it will continue to evolve.

You add all that up, and you have a changing world (and obviously not just in gaming, but society at large), but some are just looking for a boogeyman, someone to blame for natural cultural evolution. They have to be named or labeled so that they can be rebelled against for speaking out, but while individuals can be singled out, people might as well declare war on time itself, because that’s what they’re really fighting against.

Oh yeah, thought this was a relevant too… Interesting article on the subject: Houston Press Article

87

Well yeah some people well be angry over him getting a shirt, But that often a given when it comes to Redesigns, heck it happened with DMC : Devil may cry, sonic on the dream cast, So that’s a given.

Of they give him the classic out fit like in the last two seasons, sure it fixes itself

But I don’t see them changing anything about their classic outfits and the new out fits well show off who they are so that counts.

1 Like
88

that Article is kinda add.

one at the end of the day Art mimic’s life not the other way around, I don’t get why games are attacked for one reason or another, Gamer-gate was trying to get some eitches into the Video game journalist, in fact it was found that they did have a hidden group called Games Jernos pro, with they planned how they would “review” games and handle events.

Hell in fact some well know SJR have been found on that list, added with the fact that some SJW/SJR have abused some power that they had and tried to cover information up and failed at it.

I often here people saying “the games have to grow up” how when everyone gets offended when someone that could even be seen as an Adult Topic gets so called ‘Adults’ offended because they don’t want to see it.

" Games like Gone Home and Life is Strange and Under tale are all very much rejections of traditional gaming norms. They are the gaming equivalent of a child becoming an atheist after being brought up religious. "

No, they aren’t.

Gone home was a story about a female who had problem.
Life is strange Everything you do has a consequence
Undertale Game calls you a monster for killing someone in short don’t Judge people by looks.

Are the fun to play? depends on who you are.

Are they ground braking games? No, no they are not also Undertale started out as a Earth Bound mod.

At the end of the say different people like different things and each and very game made can be a work of art IF they stick to what they want to make.

Telling someone that “the lead has to be black” OR “the female has to be the vocal point.” Or “this char can’t look like that” with out a truly valid reason, Is wrong because all your doing is pushing a view point on someone else.

If you don’t like or agree with something, It’s better to leave it alone and just don’t support it unless it can’t be helped and you have to deal with it.

heck love some of Double fine’s games, Massive chalish and Iron brigade being two games I’ve played from Tim Shaffer But after the sock puppet joke, I said okay then and just stopped giving him money, and also after the whole kick starter thing, trust gone.

and that’s my point. let people make the art the want to make and you make what you think is great art.

89
90

You know, if there’s one thing that makes me sick, it’s when a bunch of SJWs and Anita Sarkessian-wannabes (including the ones on these forums) think they’re superior and don’t know how to check their privileges.

91

I’m moving this to off-topic, as it’s simply becoming a rant outlet.

3 Likes
92

I am still very mixed on this whole thing.

Part of me thinks that (if) I was a video game dev/creative director that I should be able to make the game and the character’s how I want them made and look how I want them to look. If it isn’t appropriate for kids it will get a T or M rating, at which point it is the adult/parents responsibility decision to decide if they should buy it. Same goes for people who may be offended by a female character who has a plump behind, just don’t purchase the game. Vote with that wallet.

On the other hand, I do like that some companies are getting rid of things that can be offensive to some people, and making things a little more appropriate. Now I am not saying all games need to dress their women up like nuns, but it’s cool to see that some people are making women that don’t just look like eye candy. It is just nice that there are companies out there trying to make things for everybody.

Idk how true it is, but I read somewhere that this company actually did real research on a real native american tribe to try and make the new Thunder culturally accurate, even down to him speaking a real native american language. I have a ton of respect for them going that extra mile to do that.

So yeah, I don’t think people should be forced to censor/remove/take things out of games, but I do enjoy seeing some companies deciding to make things for everybody, appeal to a broader audience, be culturally accurate etc.

93

Wtf is “gamergate”? And this thread is just lol. Gonna miss that mika butt slap but whatever. There’s other places where you can see that (or do yourself…).

Censorship and political correctness do suck though, and SJW’s who I think are a bunch of whiny punk b!Tches.

94

I’m truly sorry. I created this thread to urge you guys at MS and IG not to give in to SJWs that have become a problem in the video game industry (see Street Fighter V censorship and no western release of DOAX3 for more details) when creating season 3 content. But for some reason the SJWs derailed this simply innocent thread into off-topic territory.

So you have my permission to lock this thread before it gets any worse.

95

Here’s some videos to you understand #GamerGate.

97

I agree with that sentiment 10,000 percent, but I think it misses one key ingredient, which is the thrust of my argument: Let people critique that art and speak about it the way that they want to as well.

I’m not for censorship in any way shape or form. I don’t believe in burning books and I despise the fact that the ESRB has an AO rating that basically destroys any chance of a game finding an audience.

But I also firmly believe in people’s ability to speak on subjects and my own preference that quality debate and conversation on issues like this can be had with people who don’t have to resort to labeling, name calling, mocking, telling people to shut up or supporting opinions with more opinions and that’s BOTH sides of the conversation.

I say that because the Internet gives people unprecedented access to developers and publishers, and if people want to tell them “I don’t like that and here’s why.” Then more power to them.

So how different are video games from music or painting or sculpting? Should developers ever listen to their fans and if they do, is that serving them? Censorship (albeit self-imposed)? Both?

Mind you, I don’t come from the school of thought that believes people should tell developers what to do and shame them in to doing it. Maybe that sounds like what I’m advocating and I’m not. If these are the Social Justice people that some are down on, then I’m right there with you. The petition starters, the people that threaten other human beings over something that’s meant to be enjoyed.

But if this medium is going to be taken seriously and be held in the same regard as music or movies or painting or sculpting, it has to be strong enough and confident enough to stand up to debate, to thoughtful critiques, while at the same time allowing for change, for social progress, and for opinions to be heard.

If a developer hears a part of the fan base say something and they agree with that sentiment, then sure, change whatever you want, or don’t. But don’t be cowed in to changing something or not changing something because you’re worried that the extreme opinions on either side will take you over the coals fir it.

That’s where I come from on it. Gamer Gate… Don’t care. I understood where they started from and saw a movement hijacked, and I think that article was mainly talking about the hijackers, not the initial whistle blowers and the constructive conversation being had, but it’s been a while since I’ve read it, so u might be mistaken.

Either way, I still believe that social progress marches forward as it always has, and if I see something that objectifies or denigrates anyone and I feel like talking about it, I’ll do so. If a developer wants to change something or not change something, that’s their right as well. If a publisher, who owns the IP, believe that some changes should be made, that’s their right as owners of the IP.

This is the last I’ll say about it. I’ve enjoyed talking with you about this, but we might be going in circles a little, which is fine, we’re just having a conversation, not trying to convert anyone. I’ve said my piece now, so I’ll just leave it that, good talk though! :slightly_smiling:

98

If Cammy can have it, So can Orchid.

3 Likes
99

This is very circular logic, though. If people actually wanted AO content, then they would buy it. They would go to stores that carried it and force retailers and system makers to carry those games in order to cash in on those sales. The reason the AO label is the kiss of death is because no one wants to buy that stuff. So stores lose nothing by not carrying it, and they get to say “we won’t carry AO material.” This has been going on forever. Look at video stores. Every video store had an “adults only” section - even the major retailers, despite all the protests that it was socially irresponsible. The SJW’s of the 80’s had no impact on this. It was only when the internet essentially killed the market for rented AO material that all of the major rental companies suddenly removed their AO sections, “in the name of decency.”

And, although I agree with you (I’m a libertarian at heart), the argument that “creators should be able to create” only goes so far. There are things that people might want to create that would be unacceptable. If someone wanted to create a game about stalking minors on the internet, kidnapping them and molesting them, would that be okay? Not to me it wouldn’t.

So everyone will draw the line somewhere and there will always be “gray area” cases.

But NONE of that is happening with KI or SF. What’s going on is the developers are making decisions to not include gratuitous and trivial camera shots and outfits in order to maintain their ability to market the game to a target audience - with a T rating. That’s not censorship. That’s “creators” making decisions about what they want to do with their products.

It seems like I’m arguing with you, and I’m really not. You have made a series of well thought out and reasonable interventions. I’m just carrying on the conversation here because it’s a waste to talk to many of the other posters.

100

My take on this (at least from a video game standpoint) is that the console companies are the main cause of AO being a “release killer.” From my understanding, MS, Sony, and Nintendo all refuse to support any game which gets assigned an AO rating with any of their consoles. Console gaming is a pretty big market, I think, and so developers typically will not attempt to push an AO rating through because it limits their game’s exposure or sale numbers. You might be able to get an AO game through on PC, but I feel like most games are developed with both PC and console in mind, so the same limits apply. Plus, the ratings don’t hold up after a while, in my opinion. I have played T rated games which were probably close enough that they could have been pushed to an M rating, and M rated games which were less violent than some T rated games! When you look at the Mortal Kombat series alone, do you really think that the original MK would still be classified as M if it was released as a brand new, never before seen game today, with much more realistically violent games like MKX on the market?

In the video/■■■■ aspect, stores might not be carrying ■■■■ as frequently but it’s probably a lot more accessible with the move to the internet. I guess I see it this way - let’s say a fourth company creates a major console, we’ll call it the GameStationBox. If the company who greates the GSB decides they DO want to support games of ANY rating and allow the developers as much freedom as possible, I believe we WILL see more games released with an AO rating, whether it’s for violence or sexuality.

Essentially, I believe that it’s the console companies which are deciding the fate of AO titles rather than the consumers.

101

This is all true. But the same rules apply. If someone made an AO game for PC and released it and it made a bunch of money, then console makers would change their policies.

EDIT: I mean, can we be honest here? The market for “adults only” content in video games is terribly small. The number of people who are sitting around saying “this game is good but no crotch shot no sale!” is vanishingly small. The number of people saying “what this game needs is male full frontal and penetration shots!” is infinitely smaller. Games are already allowed to have violent content and sexual content and receive an M rating. I just played an M rated game that had both gory violence and multiple, actual depictions of on-screen sex (Wolfenstien the New Order). This game was M and didn’t generate stupid amounts of controversy. The changes people are talking about here are to move games down from a possible M (which is legal, available at Wal Mart or the Xbox store, and even on Nintendo consoles) to a T - because the audience for a T rating is actually larger. So we are talking about “Does this close up of digital genitals matter more to the game than increasing the potential market?” Developers (and Publishers) are going to say to their programmers “nope - nix the crotch cam you pervs” every time. No matter how much pseudo libertarian “defense of creative freedom” nonsense gets spammed by people on the internet.

The idea that the rating systems are preventing us from having real creative content in games is just bunk. We have emotional story telling, we have violence, we have sexual imagery, we have very adult themes (The Last of Us, among others). We aren’t missing out on anything except pornography. And I refuse to surrender to this fantasy people have that we are somehow missing out on “good games” because of radical feminists. It isn’t happening fellas.

2 Likes