1187
"Woke" games
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2024
1187 points (94.5% liked)
Microblog Memes
6015 readers
1524 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Woke isn't being progressive. It's being progressive to an extent beyond any sort of logic, virtue signaling constantly, and then calling anyone who disagrees with you morally or intellectually inferior.
In entertainment, that often results in some really annoying elements that I think we can all acknowledge are a thing after almost a decade of this:
I think there's a reason Star Wars gets more shit for being woke than Spiderverse, or that Arcane hasn't become a culture war battleground in the same way She-Hulk did. The reason being those shows are actually good, and most people are happy to watch good shows.
I fucking hate that the idea of being woke was poisoned and turned into this when it very much is not and never was.
Woke is acknowledging the systemic racism playing out daily in the United States of America.
I think most of what you wrote isn't even true to be honest, it's a well strung together list of annoying tropes which doesn't even happen nearly as much or widely as some would suggest. It's a neat little "here's a bad way of caring" package but it ain't the truth.
I appreciate the effort you went through to write the post and I understand your viewpoint. At the same time, this is a great example of how the term "woke" has been co-opted into meaning something it never really did. Being awake to the injustices present in our lives isn't a bad thing. Turning woke into a slur to wrongly characterize and misdirect away from its true original intent has been an effective, and gross, way to get people to automatically reject real critique.
You're both right, but it's far too late to take the word back, no point in going on about the origins.
No it isn’t.
I am woke, and that is a good thing, and anyone complaining about that is an idiot.
I'd be described as woke, but I've always hated the term. Maybe it's because I was just growing into it right as it became the bogeyman phrase, I don't know.
If only. But like all of your societal problems, it's being exported to all kinds of places, often where it has little relevance, but where it can be used for political gain by soulless individuals.
Your last bit is the only part that matters. Good content is good. There's so much well written progressive "woke" stuff that does well, but it's easy to point at a shitty flop and say it failed because it's "woke" rather than doing the hard work and actually analyzing why it's bad. "Woke" content isn't an issue in media. It's that we're getting so much bad and lazy writing in AAA games (and other big media). They aren't allowed to be creative, so it ends up being garbage.
Add on top of that that the games industry has laid off TENS OF THOUSANDS of devs in the last three or four years.
I know a lot of talented people who are no longer working as devs, or who have been job searching for months.
Of course this doesn't mean that the studios still producing games have narrowed their scopes, they just dump more work on the survivors.
And "woke DEI SJW snowflake game dev" is far from the only thing making games worse, it's just what a lot of gamers can easily identify as a problem.
By the time I left, my last industry job had been reduced to what felt like manning the slop hose of mtx store items made by overseas outsource studios producing soulless trash under fuck-knows-what kind of nightmare working conditions.
We started seeing more diversity in games because devs are diverse and wanted to see themselves and their friends in their art.
The problem has never been queer or black characters in games. It is, and always has been, the prioritizing of profit over quality craft.
I'd argue that forced diversity is primarily because so many higher ups don't give a fuck about gaming or making good content.
The suits just want money, and for some reason corporate thought that weighing in on social and political issues was a huge money maker in the 2020s. The journalists just want to promote their own political agenda and get ragebait clicks. The project director is someone with a corporate background but a progressive flair that makes them seem "hip" to the suits.
Meanwhile the people who give a shit, regardless of their identity, don't have a voice in the room.
I'm sure there are plenty of minorities that are super pissed about what happened to bioware, but the only way you'd hear from them is by looking at sales figures because they don't have a bully pulpit.
What happened to BioWare, in your estimation?
Who's this project director with a corporate background? Are you referring to an actual person, or is this how you assume the industry works?
Of course there are minorities who don't like Veilguard. No group is monolithic. I found two quite different critiques of the trans representation in Veilguard by trans creators, but yeah I'll admit I had to do some digging, not because I had to sift through so many agenda-pushing journalist reviews, but because youtube is absolutely FLOODED with anti-woke reactionaries pushing - guess what? ragebait content featuring thumbnails of the Qunari companion.
Complaining about forced diversity and wokeness isn't critique. When it comes down to it, these are buzzwords that wind up meaning different things to different people. This bandwagon-jumping VEILGUARD BAD, BIOWARE DOOMED shit adds nothing of value to games discourse. People who claim to care about games need to stop engaging with it and seek out or create constructive critiques instead, because it only damages the most human parts of the industry, not some corporate bottom line.
As for sales figures, it seems like it's doing just fine tbh, but I think you're wrong to assume that you could really find any sort of critical opinion by sifting through that data.
And just for the record, re: my first two paragraphs:
Over the course of development, the franchise lead writer, the EP (and actually maybe a second EP?), the creative director, and the art director all changed. This is extremely unusual not only for BioWare, but any game.
That said, the people who replaced them were not, from what I can tell, people with corporate backgrounds. They all appear to be industry veterans, many of them internal promotions and longtime BioWare employees. Go check the mobygames credits if you want to see for yourself.
Additionally, BioWare laid off "approximately" 50 people, many from the Edmonton studio, in August of 2023 partway through development of Veilguard.
Dragon Age 4 was not developed in a stable, secure environment. From what I've read, significant changes were made between the game's inception as Dreadwolf, and its release as Veilguard.
That the focus is now almost exclusively on the game's minority representation speaks volumes about what these supposed "people who care about games" actually value.
I wound up spending a significant amount of time today looking into the development history of Veilguard, and what actually got released, and what people have liked and disliked about it.
And you know what? I don't think it's an example of forced diversity at all.
I think a team trying to make a game under immense external pressures made something imperfect, but earnest and deeply personal to some of the team. And it isn't for everyone, and that's fine, actually.
I get what you're saying, but...
While I don't know about 1200s Scotland specifically, the notion that black people didn't exist in old Europe is a false narrative by racists who seem to believe immigration was invented around the 1700s (like, I've seen them claim black people don't fit into Ancient Greece, which is definitely wrong.)
I mean immigration existed, but it wasn't nearly as common as today. A lot of these IPs just plop a minority in an area where their presence would turn heads, have everyone act super casual about it because they are too lazy for a backstory, and then call everyone a bigot who points out this is sort of silly. On the flip side, there are people who will call creators bigots for not including minorities in some quasi historical setting, even if their presence was rare.
Like pretend someone was making a movie in present day central Africa. Everyone is central African. Except one dude who is pure blooded Navajo. No explanation is ever given, and the only people who seem to even notice his race is the villain.
While it's perfectly possible for someone of Navajo descent to find themselves in central Africa, it's not really that likely. Audiences would want an explanation, and would consider it unrealistic if absolutely nobody commented on it except some over the top villain.
There's also an aspect of gaslighting going on here. Over the past decade historians have made a lot of claims about racial compositions of historical groups that were later exposed to be largely inaccurate. While historical inaccuracies are always a thing, it's pretty convenient that all these inaccurate claims fit into the narrative pushed by American progressive identity politics.
What part about literally any story about heroes and adventures is "really that likely"? Every story ever told is told because they're unique and thrilling and unusual. Pretending like your problem with the "wrong" races mixing in fiction is because it's "unlikely" belies the fact that everything in these stories is unlikely. Why aren't you complaining about main characters that are shockingly born from the lost line of monarchs, the last heir able to save the kingdom? Or having a mysterious, ancient weapon literally fall into their hands? Or any other number of preposterously unlikely things that are what make these stories worth telling? You don't complain about them because they don't bother you. But a black person in Scotland? THAT'S where you draw the line? Come the fuck on.
Why do I even bother, honestly.
Great comment, you've nailed it.
Funny enough even within the Star Wars universe there are good and bad things. Mandalorian and Rogue One? Pretty great. Episode 7+ and Acolyte? Pretty shit. You'll notice though that the more forced the progressivism is in a given piece of content, the more it sucks. In other words: bad writing doesn't just fuck the story up, it bakes in messaging that doesn't even make sense contextually.
Anyone who has ever read the Sword of Truth series and encountered the author's obsession with hating socialism has seen what happens when right-wing folk do it: it ruins the experience. Why would we excuse it from progressives?
I disagree with your premise that that "forced progressivism" messes things up. Andor, for example, is the most progressive Star Wars media ever, and it's amazing for it. (It's literally about a leftist, or at least leftist coded, rebellion against Fascists, and wears it proudly.) The reason is because the people making it were allowed to be creative and were passionate about what they were making.
Its the lack of creative freedom and passion that kills things. Most things with a lot of money put into them are directed by suits, not creatives. They don't want to take risks, so they just follow trends and formulas. This leads to the media not having anything to actually say, and just a veneer of trying to appeal to certain people, without actually doing anything with it.
I haven't seen Andor so I can't comment, but I'll take the plunge on your advice.
I think corporate "progressivism" is certainly one of the culprits, but sometimes it's the creatives themselves who ruin things. Some creatives have even intentionally uprooted an IP like The Witcher's show, and Rings of Power. Sometimes progressive ideals are merely a shield against criticism, other times it's a creators' own ideals that made them ruin things, and sometimes it's just rainbow capitalism. It's not a simple issue to talk about really.
I generally agree with you, with some caveats.
I think that most IPs have subtext, and a lot of time this is in the form of a deeper political message. I think it would be silly to say progressivism in IPs is always a bad thing. That's part of the reason I mentioned Arcane and Spiderverse by name.
The problem comes from the fact that IPs are supposed to be entertainment first, messaging second. A lot of creators make a lazy and mediocre product, and somewhere in there is a ham-fisted political message. Some creators also seem to be making IPs bad on purpose as a fuck you to their target audience, which is an absolutely baffling choice.
There's also the concept of nuance that's sort of been lost. A lot of the creators will write something in some super reductive black/white way that's basically guaranteed to turn off everyone who doesn't already emphatically agree with them. This is a huge departure from a lot of older movies. For example Forrest Gump is a Republican movie, but doesn't just portray republicans as automatically good or liberals as automatically bad. The end result is that there are a lot of liberals who love Forrest Gump.
The part that I strongly disagree on is that you seem to be blaming the corporations. I think ultimately a lot of the problem here is at the fault of the creators. There have been a lot of high profile cases where studios don't interfere, give the creators a massive budget, and have their backs when controversy hits. The creators will still end up making mediocre culture war content. Todd Philips was allowed to do whatever he wanted in Joker 2. It turns out what Todd Philips wanted was for the Joker to be permanently defeated by the power of prison rape. There's no studio head in the world who would have told him to do that.
I disagree with this:
Maybe you just want entertainment, but the purpose of art has almost always been message-first. If a piece of art isn't trying to say something, what's the point? People trying to act like gaming, or any other form of art, should only focus on entertaining, and always has, are not very media-literate. I can't think of a single classically well received movie that doesn't have a message it's trying to tell.
Nuance, yeah. That's important. The goal of art is to get someone to feel like the idea you're trying to give them came from themselves. That's when it's effective. It doesn't really work when you're just telling them how to think. It just annoys people.
Also, of course some garbage will also be made when people are allowed freedom to be creative. The difference is that good things can be made in that situation, not that it always will. It pretty much never will if everything is targeted towards mass appeal. That ensures no one in particular will care because there isn't a target. They do it because it's a safe bet. This implies the alternative is more risky, meaning more failures (like Joker 2), but also the opportunity for greatness.
To be fair I'm sure if it was stylish to insert overt conservative themes into IPs those would be also too.
I don't think progressivism is the problem. I think the problem is mediocre creators either deciding to turn an expensive IP into their own political soapbox, and executives giving it the green light because they either are completely disconnected to what makes a good product or thinks the culture war will allow them to pretend that bad products are good.
And unions. Really drove that home when Richard was in the Old World.
Oh you have definitely read it. I come from a family of union men, and am myself a union executive. Reading that stuff felt surreal lol.
The one character that felt shoehorned in to me was Idris Elba as Roland in The Gunslinger. Why?! Handsome, buff, young and black are not adjectives anyone has ever used to describe Roland Deschain. LOL, King might as well come out and say he ripped the description off a 40-something Clint Eastwood.