Options

[Giant Bomb], Greasy Ham

12357100

Posts

  • Options
    PoorochondriacPoorochondriac Ah, man Ah, jeezRegistered User regular
    edited March 2014
    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.

    (Apologies for typos, I am bus postin')

    Poorochondriac on
  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    Pooro, the unfortunate truth is that if a big game has shitty graphics or bad gameplay it's not going to sell

    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?

    I have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    McHogerMcHoger Registered User regular
    I have really enjoyed the rise of people in the public eye who are REALLY into games

    Its great that a bunch of people play AAA titles but having Xavier Woods be way into windjammers or Chris Kluwe fucking love MOBA's is so awesome

    Suddenly something in Shadowrun Returns makes a whole lot more sense.

  • Options
    captainkcaptaink TexasRegistered User regular
    It's weird that Sucker Punch went from fake cities to real cities, only to turn around and make a fake tribe.

  • Options
    SCREECH OF THE FARGSCREECH OF THE FARG #1 PARROTHEAD margaritavilleRegistered User regular
    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

    gcum67ktu9e4.pngimg
  • Options
    DaypigeonDaypigeon Registered User regular
    oh god, his name is Yaiba Kamikaze

    who made this game

    I'm having a hard time believing it was Inafune

  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    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 have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    SCREECH OF THE FARGSCREECH OF THE FARG #1 PARROTHEAD margaritavilleRegistered User regular
    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

    gcum67ktu9e4.pngimg
  • Options
    captainkcaptaink TexasRegistered User regular
    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.

  • Options
    Speed RacerSpeed Racer Scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratch scritch scratchRegistered User regular
    edited March 2014
    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?

    Speed Racer on
  • Options
    TubularLuggageTubularLuggage Registered User regular
    edited March 2014
    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.

    TubularLuggage on
  • Options
    The Cow KingThe Cow King a island Registered User regular
    edited March 2014
    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

    The Cow King on
    icGJy2C.png
  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    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

    I have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    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.

  • Options
    Mr. GMr. G Registered User regular
    captaink wrote: »
    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

    6F32U1X.png
  • Options
    PoorochondriacPoorochondriac Ah, man Ah, jeezRegistered User regular
    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.

  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    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.

  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    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 have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    captainkcaptaink TexasRegistered User regular
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    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.

  • Options
    Mr. GMr. G Registered User regular
    captaink wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    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

    6F32U1X.png
  • Options
    captainkcaptaink TexasRegistered User regular
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    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

    That's so bananas. They're really into the idea of the East coast megalopolis, apparently.

  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    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

    I have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    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

  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    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 have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    captainkcaptaink TexasRegistered User regular
    In the Marvel Universe, I would definitely be a super-villain in like, Houston or Las Vegas or something.

  • Options
    Bluedude152Bluedude152 Registered User regular
    I love that they just decided that DC earth is just bigger than our earth to fit all these new cities

    p0a2ody6sqnt.jpg
  • Options
    PoorochondriacPoorochondriac Ah, man Ah, jeezRegistered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    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.

  • Options
    captainkcaptaink TexasRegistered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    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?

  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    captaink wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    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

    I have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    BlankZoeBlankZoe Registered User regular
    captaink wrote: »
    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.

    CYpGAPn.png
  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    edited March 2014
    captaink wrote: »
    Langly wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    Mr. G wrote: »
    captaink wrote: »
    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.

    Langly on
  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    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 have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    PoorochondriacPoorochondriac Ah, man Ah, jeezRegistered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    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.

  • Options
    ChincymcchillaChincymcchilla Registered User regular
    edited March 2014
    Langly wrote: »
    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

    Chincymcchilla on
    I have a podcast about Power Rangers:Teenagers With Attitude | TWA Facebook Group
  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    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.

  • Options
    LanglyLangly Registered User regular
    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.

  • Options
    David_TDavid_T A fashion yes-man is no good to me. Copenhagen, DenmarkRegistered User regular
    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.

    euj90n71sojo.png
  • Options
    Mr. GMr. G Registered User regular
    edited March 2014
    Early Days Bombcast Check-In

    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

    Mr. G on
    6F32U1X.png
  • Options
    PoorochondriacPoorochondriac Ah, man Ah, jeezRegistered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    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

  • Options
    Grey GhostGrey Ghost Registered User regular
    Langly wrote: »
    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

This discussion has been closed.