I'll be hitting the hay soon, but I will close with this - Sucker Punch's decision was disappointing, but at the end of the day, not entirely unexpected. Indians are poorly represented faaaaar more often than not.
What's really disheartening, though, is the full-throated defense of poor representation. That's a tougher pill to swallow.
I am not defending poor representation
I always want better representation for underrepresented groups
What I am saying is that the industry as a whole continues to get better and I am psyched to play as a well developed native american protagonist
He's by all accounts a good character and that's awesome
I think calling the whole thing bad representation is letting the hair spoil the whole soup, that's all
But again (and finally - then it's bed for me, I swear!), it is poor representation. (I keep using "poor" instead of "bad," because "bad" would imply it's harmful. It's not, it's just not positive.)
"Native American" is a tricky concept, because it's lumping together a very wide group of very disparate tribes. It's an inelegant term to describe a lot of folk. Tribes all have their own unique experiences, cultures, customs. By representing none of those tribes, none of those experiences, cultures, or customs, it's distanced itself from everything that the term describes. It reduces a myriad of experiences to a set of physical features, a sense of community. That isn't actively harmful, but it is certainly poor, and definitely a bummer.
If I have failed (again) to convey why this matters to me, that's my fault. That's on me.
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
Honestly, that a large AAA had their central protagonist from a minority group and it wasn't central to the character and game seems like a step forward
Like, that's the dream isn't it? A character can be Native American or female or gay and it doesn't have to be what that characters about, it's just a part of that character and may or may not be relevant
Honestly, that a large AAA had their central protagonist from a minority group and it wasn't central to the character and game seems like a step forward
Like, that's the dream isn't it? A character can be Native American or female or gay and it doesn't have to be what that characters about, it's just a part of that character and may or may not be relevant
This is why I disagree with Pooro's assessment that the tribe needed to have more of a role or be further fleshed out
like it would definitely cool if he just happened to be this actual native american instead of generic native american
but i can also see why they would shy away from putting an actual native american tribe in a game where they all get rock cancer and/or blown up
Why? What does getting blown up have to do with being Native American? Unless they suffered that fate from some bad juju/ritual gone wrong, it's not offensive.
even if Delsin's tribal heritage wasn't a central part of his story or character, it was just a minor character detail
why wouldn't you still want them to go to the effort of making him a member of a real tribe, and getting the details right insofar as they come up
like, if it's the case that the tribe stuff comes up very infrequently, then doesn't that just mean that it would be easier to do things right, because you've given yourself fewer opportunities to screw up?
Honestly, that a large AAA had their central protagonist from a minority group and it wasn't central to the character and game seems like a step forward
Like, that's the dream isn't it? A character can be Native American or female or gay and it doesn't have to be what that characters about, it's just a part of that character and may or may not be relevant
This is why I disagree with Pooro's assessment that the tribe needed to have more of a role or be further fleshed out
Why can't he just be native american
I think the issue is more that 'native american' isn't a culture, it's a catchall for a large number of cultures.
It's like having a character who's 'european' or 'asian' and then having them be from a fictional country that may sort of resemble an actual one.
It's far from the worst thing in the world, but even with no ill intent behind the decision, there are issues with it.
It's a bit like if you had a 'european' protagonist from the fictional country of Frollande, who was a well written three dimensional character, and told a french or italian person it was great to see their 'european' culture represented. Not the worst thing, but not the step forward it could be. Now throw into the mix the fact that many people actually do think 'native american' is one thing, and you can see how, even with the best of intentions, it's a bit of a missed opportunity.
This is just me but if its a fake tribe with no connection to the real world some people might actually get the idea that first nations people don't exist.
By using a fake something in a real world that is the vibe they are sending.
edit: this was weird post but I was having a discussion about this at work with a good friend of mine the other day and it was lengthy with multiple conclusions
even if Delsin's tribal heritage wasn't a central part of his story or character, it was just a minor character detail
why wouldn't you still want them to go to the effort of making him a member of a real tribe, and getting the details right insofar as they come up
like, if it's the case that the tribe stuff comes up very infrequently, then doesn't that just mean that it would be easier to do things right, because you've given yourself fewer opportunities to screw up?
To be clear, I would absolutely rather that happen
I just think that saying the whole thing was poorly done because of that overlooks this character a lot of people clearly like
Honestly, that a large AAA had their central protagonist from a minority group and it wasn't central to the character and game seems like a step forward
Like, that's the dream isn't it? A character can be Native American or female or gay and it doesn't have to be what that characters about, it's just a part of that character and may or may not be relevant
This argument goes back to the beginning of the Harlem Renaissance, and it is one in which people still disagree. Does the fictional representation of minorities need to be something that is simply present, while they act as any other character would (while still informed by their ethnicity/sexuality if done well), or does their ethnicity need to in large part become what the character is. Is he a gay astronaut or is he a GAY astronaut? One side is going to say that the best way to force a culture to accept a minority is to create characters that have a label, but to have it not be the overt trait of the character. The other is going to say that representation should be all-encompassing, and that fiction should be driving cultural acceptance by having that trait be front and center.
They're two different approaches, and there are legitimate arguments for both sides.
Honestly, that a large AAA had their central protagonist from a minority group and it wasn't central to the character and game seems like a step forward
Like, that's the dream isn't it? A character can be Native American or female or gay and it doesn't have to be what that characters about, it's just a part of that character and may or may not be relevant
This is why I disagree with Pooro's assessment that the tribe needed to have more of a role or be further fleshed out
Why can't he just be native american
Couldn't sleep, because there are roofers at work.
I never said, anywhere, that the tribe needs to have more of a role, or be further fleshed out. I am perfectly fine with his heritage being just a part of who he is. My issue is, and has always been, that the tribe is needlessly, pointlessly, disappointingly fictitious.
I'll be hitting the hay soon, but I will close with this - Sucker Punch's decision was disappointing, but at the end of the day, not entirely unexpected. Indians are poorly represented faaaaar more often than not.
What's really disheartening, though, is the full-throated defense of poor representation. That's a tougher pill to swallow.
I am not defending poor representation
I always want better representation for underrepresented groups
What I am saying is that the industry as a whole continues to get better and I am psyched to play as a well developed native american protagonist
He's by all accounts a good character and that's awesome
I think calling the whole thing bad representation is letting the hair spoil the whole soup, that's all
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
Well I think that the argument here is a little different, because it is something that can easily be dropped. A game has to have graphics, by definition. It has to have some sort of visual representation. A game designer can't say oh well making this world is too hard, I'll just drop it. Well, now I don't have a product at all.
They absolutely can say, making this minority representation is too hard, let's just have a white guy with a beard. And immediately that choice is made and now everything is easier.
To your point about this forum and game designers not seeing it, I think you and chincy are arguing at cross purposes. He's talking about the criticism they will see, and you are talking about your own specific criticisms in this thread. I don't think there's been a big public outcry about this, or at least I haven't seen it, but let's say for the sake of argument that there was. Everyone on Twitter and Tumblr makes a big stir about this representation, and now the designers do see it. From a pure business prospective, I can easily see the reaction not being "ok next time let's do better," and instead being "next time let's just not try that."
I'm not saying you're wrong to bring criticism or even that a large public outcry would be wrong either, just that the idea that the way the company will take that sort of anger could easily be "let's not rattle that wasp's nest again." Because if they don't, then they're merely contributing to an overall status quo problem, and it's more difficult to get mad at someone for not even trying.
Honestly, that a large AAA had their central protagonist from a minority group and it wasn't central to the character and game seems like a step forward
Like, that's the dream isn't it? A character can be Native American or female or gay and it doesn't have to be what that characters about, it's just a part of that character and may or may not be relevant
This is why I disagree with Pooro's assessment that the tribe needed to have more of a role or be further fleshed out
Why can't he just be native american
Couldn't sleep, because there are roofers at work.
I never said, anywhere, that the tribe needs to have more of a role, or be further fleshed out. I am perfectly fine with his heritage being just a part of who he is. My issue is, and has always been, that the tribe is needlessly, pointlessly, disappointingly fictitious.
Fair enough, I misunderstood that part of your argument
I'll be hitting the hay soon, but I will close with this - Sucker Punch's decision was disappointing, but at the end of the day, not entirely unexpected. Indians are poorly represented faaaaar more often than not.
What's really disheartening, though, is the full-throated defense of poor representation. That's a tougher pill to swallow.
I am not defending poor representation
I always want better representation for underrepresented groups
What I am saying is that the industry as a whole continues to get better and I am psyched to play as a well developed native american protagonist
He's by all accounts a good character and that's awesome
I think calling the whole thing bad representation is letting the hair spoil the whole soup, that's all
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
Well I think that the argument here is a little different, because it is something that can easily be dropped. A game has to have graphics, by definition. It has to have some sort of visual representation. A game designer can't say oh well making this world is too hard, I'll just drop it. Well, now I don't have a product at all.
They absolutely can say, making this minority representation is too hard, let's just have a white guy with a beard. And immediately that choice is made and now everything is easier.
To your point about this forum and game designers not seeing it, I think you and chincy are arguing at cross purposes. He's talking about the criticism they will see, and you are talking about your own specific criticisms in this thread. I don't think there's been a big public outcry about this, or at least I haven't seen it, but let's say for the sake of argument that there was. Everyone on Twitter and Tumblr makes a big stir about this representation, and now the designers do see it. From a pure business prospective, I can easily see the reaction not being "ok next time let's do better," and instead being "next time let's just not try that."
I'm not saying you're wrong to bring criticism or even that a large public outcry would be wrong either, just that the idea that the way the company will take that sort of anger could easily be "let's not rattle that wasp's nest again." Because if they don't, then they're merely contributing to an overall status quo problem, and it's more difficult to get mad at someone for not even trying.
Yes thank you
I'm not saying that things shouldn't be better and I'm not saying you shouldn't speak out
But I worry what would happen if the designers got hold of a lot of concern over the portrayal
It's weird that Sucker Punch went from fake cities to real cities, only to turn around and make a fake tribe.
Sucker Punch has screwed their world all up
New Orleans and New York are still fake, but Seattle is real
They reference NEW MARAIS and EMPIRE CITY
But this is Seattle and here is the Space Needle also Sub Pop logos are on buildings
We can only hope the next game is set in NYC.
This has reminded me that apparently in the Batman universe New York City is still real??
Like in Batman's America
They have Gotham City
Metropolis
AND New York City
it is worse than that. The East Coast is Gotham City, Bludhaven, Metropolis, New York, Boston, Baltimore, Keystone City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Washington DC
It's weird that Sucker Punch went from fake cities to real cities, only to turn around and make a fake tribe.
Sucker Punch has screwed their world all up
New Orleans and New York are still fake, but Seattle is real
They reference NEW MARAIS and EMPIRE CITY
But this is Seattle and here is the Space Needle also Sub Pop logos are on buildings
We can only hope the next game is set in NYC.
This has reminded me that apparently in the Batman universe New York City is still real??
Like in Batman's America
They have Gotham City
Metropolis
AND New York City
it is worse than that. The East Coast is Gotham City, Bludhaven, Metropolis, New York, Boston, Baltimore, Keystone City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Washington DC
Yeah that whole thing is a huge fucking mess
It almost makes Marvel's approach of EVERYONE LIVES IN NEW YORK seem better
I'll be hitting the hay soon, but I will close with this - Sucker Punch's decision was disappointing, but at the end of the day, not entirely unexpected. Indians are poorly represented faaaaar more often than not.
What's really disheartening, though, is the full-throated defense of poor representation. That's a tougher pill to swallow.
I am not defending poor representation
I always want better representation for underrepresented groups
What I am saying is that the industry as a whole continues to get better and I am psyched to play as a well developed native american protagonist
He's by all accounts a good character and that's awesome
I think calling the whole thing bad representation is letting the hair spoil the whole soup, that's all
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
Well I think that the argument here is a little different, because it is something that can easily be dropped. A game has to have graphics, by definition. It has to have some sort of visual representation. A game designer can't say oh well making this world is too hard, I'll just drop it. Well, now I don't have a product at all.
They absolutely can say, making this minority representation is too hard, let's just have a white guy with a beard. And immediately that choice is made and now everything is easier.
To your point about this forum and game designers not seeing it, I think you and chincy are arguing at cross purposes. He's talking about the criticism they will see, and you are talking about your own specific criticisms in this thread. I don't think there's been a big public outcry about this, or at least I haven't seen it, but let's say for the sake of argument that there was. Everyone on Twitter and Tumblr makes a big stir about this representation, and now the designers do see it. From a pure business prospective, I can easily see the reaction not being "ok next time let's do better," and instead being "next time let's just not try that."
I'm not saying you're wrong to bring criticism or even that a large public outcry would be wrong either, just that the idea that the way the company will take that sort of anger could easily be "let's not rattle that wasp's nest again." Because if they don't, then they're merely contributing to an overall status quo problem, and it's more difficult to get mad at someone for not even trying.
I went hyperbolic for emphasis, but I was commenting more on how unfortunate it is that game developers seem to embrace technical challenges - always going bigger, better, newer, shinier - but shy away from challenges in the realm of representation. Like, we're gonna have virtual reality before we have consistently well-portrayed female characters, and women are 52% of the world. It's funny, is all. (and by funny I mean sad). I wasn't literally asking why developers never go "fine, we won't have graphics," that would be insane.
My take on the "but what if they take the wrong message away" argument is that it cuts both ways. If nothing is said, if they're praised for a lackluster effort, what if they take the wrong message away? What if instead of, "That went well, we should keep exploring that," they go, "Aha, nailed it, got it in one" and halfass their way through all future minority portrayals? That's the problem with modeling present behavior off of potential futures - you can't ever really know one way or the other. A well-meaning attempt to stifle criticism is still an attempt to stifle criticism, at the end of the day, and that tends to chap my hide a lil bit no matter what.
It's weird that Sucker Punch went from fake cities to real cities, only to turn around and make a fake tribe.
Sucker Punch has screwed their world all up
New Orleans and New York are still fake, but Seattle is real
They reference NEW MARAIS and EMPIRE CITY
But this is Seattle and here is the Space Needle also Sub Pop logos are on buildings
We can only hope the next game is set in NYC.
This has reminded me that apparently in the Batman universe New York City is still real??
Like in Batman's America
They have Gotham City
Metropolis
AND New York City
it is worse than that. The East Coast is Gotham City, Bludhaven, Metropolis, New York, Boston, Baltimore, Keystone City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Washington DC
It's weird that Sucker Punch went from fake cities to real cities, only to turn around and make a fake tribe.
Sucker Punch has screwed their world all up
New Orleans and New York are still fake, but Seattle is real
They reference NEW MARAIS and EMPIRE CITY
But this is Seattle and here is the Space Needle also Sub Pop logos are on buildings
We can only hope the next game is set in NYC.
This has reminded me that apparently in the Batman universe New York City is still real??
Like in Batman's America
They have Gotham City
Metropolis
AND New York City
it is worse than that. The East Coast is Gotham City, Bludhaven, Metropolis, New York, Boston, Baltimore, Keystone City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Washington DC
Is Bludhaven Vampire New York?
No
Bludhaven is all the bad parts of cities like Detroid and Oakland rolled up into one
In the Marvel Universe, I would definitely be a super-villain in like, Houston or Las Vegas or something.
They actually kind of addressed this via the 50 State Initiative which gave every state a superteam. The system was mothballed but a lot of the teams stuck around.
Also Scarlet Spider was in Houston for a few years.
It's weird that Sucker Punch went from fake cities to real cities, only to turn around and make a fake tribe.
Sucker Punch has screwed their world all up
New Orleans and New York are still fake, but Seattle is real
They reference NEW MARAIS and EMPIRE CITY
But this is Seattle and here is the Space Needle also Sub Pop logos are on buildings
We can only hope the next game is set in NYC.
This has reminded me that apparently in the Batman universe New York City is still real??
Like in Batman's America
They have Gotham City
Metropolis
AND New York City
it is worse than that. The East Coast is Gotham City, Bludhaven, Metropolis, New York, Boston, Baltimore, Keystone City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Washington DC
Is Bludhaven Vampire New York?
It is Vampire Jersey City
Edit: Gotham and Bludhaven are both in New Jersey, Metropolis is all along the east coast, New York is where it should be, Keystone city is in Pennsylvania with Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.
I'll be hitting the hay soon, but I will close with this - Sucker Punch's decision was disappointing, but at the end of the day, not entirely unexpected. Indians are poorly represented faaaaar more often than not.
What's really disheartening, though, is the full-throated defense of poor representation. That's a tougher pill to swallow.
I am not defending poor representation
I always want better representation for underrepresented groups
What I am saying is that the industry as a whole continues to get better and I am psyched to play as a well developed native american protagonist
He's by all accounts a good character and that's awesome
I think calling the whole thing bad representation is letting the hair spoil the whole soup, that's all
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
Well I think that the argument here is a little different, because it is something that can easily be dropped. A game has to have graphics, by definition. It has to have some sort of visual representation. A game designer can't say oh well making this world is too hard, I'll just drop it. Well, now I don't have a product at all.
They absolutely can say, making this minority representation is too hard, let's just have a white guy with a beard. And immediately that choice is made and now everything is easier.
To your point about this forum and game designers not seeing it, I think you and chincy are arguing at cross purposes. He's talking about the criticism they will see, and you are talking about your own specific criticisms in this thread. I don't think there's been a big public outcry about this, or at least I haven't seen it, but let's say for the sake of argument that there was. Everyone on Twitter and Tumblr makes a big stir about this representation, and now the designers do see it. From a pure business prospective, I can easily see the reaction not being "ok next time let's do better," and instead being "next time let's just not try that."
I'm not saying you're wrong to bring criticism or even that a large public outcry would be wrong either, just that the idea that the way the company will take that sort of anger could easily be "let's not rattle that wasp's nest again." Because if they don't, then they're merely contributing to an overall status quo problem, and it's more difficult to get mad at someone for not even trying.
I went hyperbolic for emphasis, but I was commenting more on how unfortunate it is that game developers seem to embrace technical challenges - always going bigger, better, newer, shinier - but shy away from challenges in the realm of representation. Like, we're gonna have virtual reality before we have consistently well-portrayed female characters, and women are 52% of the world. It's funny, is all. (and by funny I mean sad). I wasn't literally asking why developers never go "fine, we won't have graphics," that would be insane.
My take on the "but what if they take the wrong message away" argument is that it cuts both ways. If nothing is said, if they're praised for a lackluster effort, what if they take the wrong message away? What if instead of, "That went well, we should keep exploring that," they go, "Aha, nailed it, got it in one" and halfass their way through all future minority portrayals? That's the problem with modeling present behavior off of potential futures - you can't ever really know one way or the other. A well-meaning attempt to stifle criticism is still an attempt to stifle criticism, at the end of the day, and that tends to chap my hide a lil bit no matter what.
Just like you didn't say that the tribe should play a bigger role, I did not say nothing should be said
In fact I said multiple times you SHOULD speak out
I just think it should be tempered with "Hey this is a character from a minority that a lot of people really like, that's great, here's how to get better"
I'll be hitting the hay soon, but I will close with this - Sucker Punch's decision was disappointing, but at the end of the day, not entirely unexpected. Indians are poorly represented faaaaar more often than not.
What's really disheartening, though, is the full-throated defense of poor representation. That's a tougher pill to swallow.
I am not defending poor representation
I always want better representation for underrepresented groups
What I am saying is that the industry as a whole continues to get better and I am psyched to play as a well developed native american protagonist
He's by all accounts a good character and that's awesome
I think calling the whole thing bad representation is letting the hair spoil the whole soup, that's all
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
Well I think that the argument here is a little different, because it is something that can easily be dropped. A game has to have graphics, by definition. It has to have some sort of visual representation. A game designer can't say oh well making this world is too hard, I'll just drop it. Well, now I don't have a product at all.
They absolutely can say, making this minority representation is too hard, let's just have a white guy with a beard. And immediately that choice is made and now everything is easier.
To your point about this forum and game designers not seeing it, I think you and chincy are arguing at cross purposes. He's talking about the criticism they will see, and you are talking about your own specific criticisms in this thread. I don't think there's been a big public outcry about this, or at least I haven't seen it, but let's say for the sake of argument that there was. Everyone on Twitter and Tumblr makes a big stir about this representation, and now the designers do see it. From a pure business prospective, I can easily see the reaction not being "ok next time let's do better," and instead being "next time let's just not try that."
I'm not saying you're wrong to bring criticism or even that a large public outcry would be wrong either, just that the idea that the way the company will take that sort of anger could easily be "let's not rattle that wasp's nest again." Because if they don't, then they're merely contributing to an overall status quo problem, and it's more difficult to get mad at someone for not even trying.
I went hyperbolic for emphasis, but I was commenting more on how unfortunate it is that game developers seem to embrace technical challenges - always going bigger, better, newer, shinier - but shy away from challenges in the realm of representation. Like, we're gonna have virtual reality before we have consistently well-portrayed female characters, and women are 52% of the world. It's funny, is all. (and by funny I mean sad). I wasn't literally asking why developers never go "fine, we won't have graphics," that would be insane.
My take on the "but what if they take the wrong message away" argument is that it cuts both ways. If nothing is said, if they're praised for a lackluster effort, what if they take the wrong message away? What if instead of, "That went well, we should keep exploring that," they go, "Aha, nailed it, got it in one" and halfass their way through all future minority portrayals? That's the problem with modeling present behavior off of potential futures - you can't ever really know one way or the other. A well-meaning attempt to stifle criticism is still an attempt to stifle criticism, at the end of the day, and that tends to chap my hide a lil bit no matter what.
Just like you didn't say that the tribe should play a bigger role, I did not say nothing should be said
In fact I said multiple times you SHOULD speak out
I just think it should be tempered with "Hey this is a character from a minority that a lot of people really like, that's great, here's how to get better"
And just as we apparently disagree on the definition of "poor representation," we apparently disagree on the level of deference due to developers.
I'll be hitting the hay soon, but I will close with this - Sucker Punch's decision was disappointing, but at the end of the day, not entirely unexpected. Indians are poorly represented faaaaar more often than not.
What's really disheartening, though, is the full-throated defense of poor representation. That's a tougher pill to swallow.
I am not defending poor representation
I always want better representation for underrepresented groups
What I am saying is that the industry as a whole continues to get better and I am psyched to play as a well developed native american protagonist
He's by all accounts a good character and that's awesome
I think calling the whole thing bad representation is letting the hair spoil the whole soup, that's all
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
Well I think that the argument here is a little different, because it is something that can easily be dropped. A game has to have graphics, by definition. It has to have some sort of visual representation. A game designer can't say oh well making this world is too hard, I'll just drop it. Well, now I don't have a product at all.
They absolutely can say, making this minority representation is too hard, let's just have a white guy with a beard. And immediately that choice is made and now everything is easier.
To your point about this forum and game designers not seeing it, I think you and chincy are arguing at cross purposes. He's talking about the criticism they will see, and you are talking about your own specific criticisms in this thread. I don't think there's been a big public outcry about this, or at least I haven't seen it, but let's say for the sake of argument that there was. Everyone on Twitter and Tumblr makes a big stir about this representation, and now the designers do see it. From a pure business prospective, I can easily see the reaction not being "ok next time let's do better," and instead being "next time let's just not try that."
I'm not saying you're wrong to bring criticism or even that a large public outcry would be wrong either, just that the idea that the way the company will take that sort of anger could easily be "let's not rattle that wasp's nest again." Because if they don't, then they're merely contributing to an overall status quo problem, and it's more difficult to get mad at someone for not even trying.
I went hyperbolic for emphasis, but I was commenting more on how unfortunate it is that game developers seem to embrace technical challenges - always going bigger, better, newer, shinier - but shy away from challenges in the realm of representation. Like, we're gonna have virtual reality before we have consistently well-portrayed female characters, and women are 52% of the world. It's funny, is all. (and by funny I mean sad). I wasn't literally asking why developers never go "fine, we won't have graphics," that would be insane.
My take on the "but what if they take the wrong message away" argument is that it cuts both ways. If nothing is said, if they're praised for a lackluster effort, what if they take the wrong message away? What if instead of, "That went well, we should keep exploring that," they go, "Aha, nailed it, got it in one" and halfass their way through all future minority portrayals? That's the problem with modeling present behavior off of potential futures - you can't ever really know one way or the other. A well-meaning attempt to stifle criticism is still an attempt to stifle criticism, at the end of the day, and that tends to chap my hide a lil bit no matter what.
Just like you didn't say that the tribe should play a bigger role, I did not say nothing should be said
In fact I said multiple times you SHOULD speak out
I just think it should be tempered with "Hey this is a character from a minority that a lot of people really like, that's great, here's how to get better"
And just as we apparently disagree on the definition of "poor representation," we apparently disagree on the level of deference due to developers.
Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.
I think everyone who is trying to do something good should be given the benefit of the doubt weather they're a developer or not, yeah
I don't think coming down on someone the first time they try something and get it wrong is constructive or helpful to anyone
We live in an age where a thousand billion voices are heard through invisible streams of data every second of every day, and they're talking to faceless groups who have no real motive or inclination to listen to them in the first place. It is the nature of the beast that discussion needs to grow louder and lean into the discussion further, because otherwise nothing of importance can be heard. It does quite a bit to get minorities' voices heard, but it's not really made for complex or lenient discussion.
you can write someone an email that goes into the finer points of ethical representation and the person on the other end, if they read it at all, will care approximately zero percent.
but if you get a ton of people to loudly talk about why this is bad, then it actually might get through.
0
Options
David_TA fashion yes-man is no good to me.Copenhagen, DenmarkRegistered Userregular
Good karma in InFamous is blue, evil is red and the lightbar on the DS4 changes color appropriately. Level two evil karma is even noticably more red than level one.
This has nothing to do with the argument at hand, just something I only just noticed today.
I'll be hitting the hay soon, but I will close with this - Sucker Punch's decision was disappointing, but at the end of the day, not entirely unexpected. Indians are poorly represented faaaaar more often than not.
What's really disheartening, though, is the full-throated defense of poor representation. That's a tougher pill to swallow.
I am not defending poor representation
I always want better representation for underrepresented groups
What I am saying is that the industry as a whole continues to get better and I am psyched to play as a well developed native american protagonist
He's by all accounts a good character and that's awesome
I think calling the whole thing bad representation is letting the hair spoil the whole soup, that's all
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
Well I think that the argument here is a little different, because it is something that can easily be dropped. A game has to have graphics, by definition. It has to have some sort of visual representation. A game designer can't say oh well making this world is too hard, I'll just drop it. Well, now I don't have a product at all.
They absolutely can say, making this minority representation is too hard, let's just have a white guy with a beard. And immediately that choice is made and now everything is easier.
To your point about this forum and game designers not seeing it, I think you and chincy are arguing at cross purposes. He's talking about the criticism they will see, and you are talking about your own specific criticisms in this thread. I don't think there's been a big public outcry about this, or at least I haven't seen it, but let's say for the sake of argument that there was. Everyone on Twitter and Tumblr makes a big stir about this representation, and now the designers do see it. From a pure business prospective, I can easily see the reaction not being "ok next time let's do better," and instead being "next time let's just not try that."
I'm not saying you're wrong to bring criticism or even that a large public outcry would be wrong either, just that the idea that the way the company will take that sort of anger could easily be "let's not rattle that wasp's nest again." Because if they don't, then they're merely contributing to an overall status quo problem, and it's more difficult to get mad at someone for not even trying.
I went hyperbolic for emphasis, but I was commenting more on how unfortunate it is that game developers seem to embrace technical challenges - always going bigger, better, newer, shinier - but shy away from challenges in the realm of representation. Like, we're gonna have virtual reality before we have consistently well-portrayed female characters, and women are 52% of the world. It's funny, is all. (and by funny I mean sad). I wasn't literally asking why developers never go "fine, we won't have graphics," that would be insane.
My take on the "but what if they take the wrong message away" argument is that it cuts both ways. If nothing is said, if they're praised for a lackluster effort, what if they take the wrong message away? What if instead of, "That went well, we should keep exploring that," they go, "Aha, nailed it, got it in one" and halfass their way through all future minority portrayals? That's the problem with modeling present behavior off of potential futures - you can't ever really know one way or the other. A well-meaning attempt to stifle criticism is still an attempt to stifle criticism, at the end of the day, and that tends to chap my hide a lil bit no matter what.
Just like you didn't say that the tribe should play a bigger role, I did not say nothing should be said
In fact I said multiple times you SHOULD speak out
I just think it should be tempered with "Hey this is a character from a minority that a lot of people really like, that's great, here's how to get better"
And just as we apparently disagree on the definition of "poor representation," we apparently disagree on the level of deference due to developers.
Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.
I think everyone who is trying to do something good should be given the benefit of the doubt weather they're a developer or not, yeah
I don't think coming down on someone the first time they try something and get it wrong is constructive or helpful to anyone
Then I guess we also disagree on how pure we think their motives were in this particular instance, but that gets into gut feelings and all sorts of unprovable stuff that I wouldn't be totally comfortable wading into
We live in an age where a thousand billion voices are heard through invisible streams of data every second of every day, and they're talking to faceless groups who have no real motive or inclination to listen to them in the first place.
I really had to go check to make sure this wasn't some Deus Ex quote
Posts
But again (and finally - then it's bed for me, I swear!), it is poor representation. (I keep using "poor" instead of "bad," because "bad" would imply it's harmful. It's not, it's just not positive.)
"Native American" is a tricky concept, because it's lumping together a very wide group of very disparate tribes. It's an inelegant term to describe a lot of folk. Tribes all have their own unique experiences, cultures, customs. By representing none of those tribes, none of those experiences, cultures, or customs, it's distanced itself from everything that the term describes. It reduces a myriad of experiences to a set of physical features, a sense of community. That isn't actively harmful, but it is certainly poor, and definitely a bummer.
If I have failed (again) to convey why this matters to me, that's my fault. That's on me.
One final piece of food for thought - a thing I think is weird in conversations about represtation is the "Well if it's this hard/they get grief, maybe they shouldn't bother." Because that defense comes up in no other element of game design. If I criticized a game's graphics, nobody would say "Well I guess they shouldn't have bothered having graphics at all." And hiring a consultant is waaaaaay easier than rendering the Space Needle in exquisite detail. Something being hard almost never stops game developers, until it comes to representation.
(Apologies for typos, I am bus postin')
If it has a white dude instead of a Native-American it still will
And again, all of what I'm posting comes from a place of me wanting MORE diversity, not less
I guess we disagree on what constitutes poor representation so I don't think this is gonna go much further
I'll just say I hope that companies continue to get better at this in the future
I think we can both agree on that at least?
Suddenly something in Shadowrun Returns makes a whole lot more sense.
Like, that's the dream isn't it? A character can be Native American or female or gay and it doesn't have to be what that characters about, it's just a part of that character and may or may not be relevant
who made this game
I'm having a hard time believing it was Inafune
This is why I disagree with Pooro's assessment that the tribe needed to have more of a role or be further fleshed out
Why can't he just be native american
but i can also see why they would shy away from putting an actual native american tribe in a game where they all get rock cancer and/or blown up
Why? What does getting blown up have to do with being Native American? Unless they suffered that fate from some bad juju/ritual gone wrong, it's not offensive.
why wouldn't you still want them to go to the effort of making him a member of a real tribe, and getting the details right insofar as they come up
like, if it's the case that the tribe stuff comes up very infrequently, then doesn't that just mean that it would be easier to do things right, because you've given yourself fewer opportunities to screw up?
http://www.audioentropy.com/
I think the issue is more that 'native american' isn't a culture, it's a catchall for a large number of cultures.
It's like having a character who's 'european' or 'asian' and then having them be from a fictional country that may sort of resemble an actual one.
It's far from the worst thing in the world, but even with no ill intent behind the decision, there are issues with it.
It's a bit like if you had a 'european' protagonist from the fictional country of Frollande, who was a well written three dimensional character, and told a french or italian person it was great to see their 'european' culture represented. Not the worst thing, but not the step forward it could be. Now throw into the mix the fact that many people actually do think 'native american' is one thing, and you can see how, even with the best of intentions, it's a bit of a missed opportunity.
By using a fake something in a real world that is the vibe they are sending.
edit: this was weird post but I was having a discussion about this at work with a good friend of mine the other day and it was lengthy with multiple conclusions
To be clear, I would absolutely rather that happen
I just think that saying the whole thing was poorly done because of that overlooks this character a lot of people clearly like
This argument goes back to the beginning of the Harlem Renaissance, and it is one in which people still disagree. Does the fictional representation of minorities need to be something that is simply present, while they act as any other character would (while still informed by their ethnicity/sexuality if done well), or does their ethnicity need to in large part become what the character is. Is he a gay astronaut or is he a GAY astronaut? One side is going to say that the best way to force a culture to accept a minority is to create characters that have a label, but to have it not be the overt trait of the character. The other is going to say that representation should be all-encompassing, and that fiction should be driving cultural acceptance by having that trait be front and center.
They're two different approaches, and there are legitimate arguments for both sides.
Sucker Punch has screwed their world all up
New Orleans and New York are still fake, but Seattle is real
They reference NEW MARAIS and EMPIRE CITY
But this is Seattle and here is the Space Needle also Sub Pop logos are on buildings
Couldn't sleep, because there are roofers at work.
I never said, anywhere, that the tribe needs to have more of a role, or be further fleshed out. I am perfectly fine with his heritage being just a part of who he is. My issue is, and has always been, that the tribe is needlessly, pointlessly, disappointingly fictitious.
Well I think that the argument here is a little different, because it is something that can easily be dropped. A game has to have graphics, by definition. It has to have some sort of visual representation. A game designer can't say oh well making this world is too hard, I'll just drop it. Well, now I don't have a product at all.
They absolutely can say, making this minority representation is too hard, let's just have a white guy with a beard. And immediately that choice is made and now everything is easier.
To your point about this forum and game designers not seeing it, I think you and chincy are arguing at cross purposes. He's talking about the criticism they will see, and you are talking about your own specific criticisms in this thread. I don't think there's been a big public outcry about this, or at least I haven't seen it, but let's say for the sake of argument that there was. Everyone on Twitter and Tumblr makes a big stir about this representation, and now the designers do see it. From a pure business prospective, I can easily see the reaction not being "ok next time let's do better," and instead being "next time let's just not try that."
I'm not saying you're wrong to bring criticism or even that a large public outcry would be wrong either, just that the idea that the way the company will take that sort of anger could easily be "let's not rattle that wasp's nest again." Because if they don't, then they're merely contributing to an overall status quo problem, and it's more difficult to get mad at someone for not even trying.
Fair enough, I misunderstood that part of your argument
We can only hope the next game is set in NYC.
This has reminded me that apparently in the Batman universe New York City is still real??
Like in Batman's America
They have Gotham City
Metropolis
AND New York City
That's so bananas. They're really into the idea of the East coast megalopolis, apparently.
Yes thank you
I'm not saying that things shouldn't be better and I'm not saying you shouldn't speak out
But I worry what would happen if the designers got hold of a lot of concern over the portrayal
it is worse than that. The East Coast is Gotham City, Bludhaven, Metropolis, New York, Boston, Baltimore, Keystone City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Washington DC
Yeah that whole thing is a huge fucking mess
It almost makes Marvel's approach of EVERYONE LIVES IN NEW YORK seem better
I went hyperbolic for emphasis, but I was commenting more on how unfortunate it is that game developers seem to embrace technical challenges - always going bigger, better, newer, shinier - but shy away from challenges in the realm of representation. Like, we're gonna have virtual reality before we have consistently well-portrayed female characters, and women are 52% of the world. It's funny, is all. (and by funny I mean sad). I wasn't literally asking why developers never go "fine, we won't have graphics," that would be insane.
My take on the "but what if they take the wrong message away" argument is that it cuts both ways. If nothing is said, if they're praised for a lackluster effort, what if they take the wrong message away? What if instead of, "That went well, we should keep exploring that," they go, "Aha, nailed it, got it in one" and halfass their way through all future minority portrayals? That's the problem with modeling present behavior off of potential futures - you can't ever really know one way or the other. A well-meaning attempt to stifle criticism is still an attempt to stifle criticism, at the end of the day, and that tends to chap my hide a lil bit no matter what.
Is Bludhaven Vampire New York?
No
Bludhaven is all the bad parts of cities like Detroid and Oakland rolled up into one
Also Scarlet Spider was in Houston for a few years.
It is Vampire Jersey City
Edit: Gotham and Bludhaven are both in New Jersey, Metropolis is all along the east coast, New York is where it should be, Keystone city is in Pennsylvania with Pittsburgh and Philadelphia.
Just like you didn't say that the tribe should play a bigger role, I did not say nothing should be said
In fact I said multiple times you SHOULD speak out
I just think it should be tempered with "Hey this is a character from a minority that a lot of people really like, that's great, here's how to get better"
And just as we apparently disagree on the definition of "poor representation," we apparently disagree on the level of deference due to developers.
Diff'rent strokes for diff'rent folks.
I think everyone who is trying to do something good should be given the benefit of the doubt weather they're a developer or not, yeah
I don't think coming down on someone the first time they try something and get it wrong is constructive or helpful to anyone
but if you get a ton of people to loudly talk about why this is bad, then it actually might get through.
This has nothing to do with the argument at hand, just something I only just noticed today.
March 2008
"Guitar Hero: Beatles" sounds really stupid, why don't they make a Rock Band Beatles game, Guitar Hero is just guitar and Rock Band is the whole band
Ryan thinks eventually Guitar Hero will have to add multiple instruments and Jeff thinks they don't have to do shit, Guitar Hero's doing just fine
Then I guess we also disagree on how pure we think their motives were in this particular instance, but that gets into gut feelings and all sorts of unprovable stuff that I wouldn't be totally comfortable wading into
I really had to go check to make sure this wasn't some Deus Ex quote