Options

Penny Arcade - Comic - Intentionality

DogDog Registered User, Administrator, Vanilla Staff admin

Intentionality!

Penny Arcade - Comic - Intentionality

Videogaming-related online strip by Mike Krahulik and Jerry Holkins. Includes news and commentary.

Read the full story here

«1

Posts

  • Options
    AsheramAsheram Registered User regular
    "We have heard your concerns and contemplated them, thus we have come up with a system to show just how token our characters are."

  • Options
    Hahnsoo1Hahnsoo1 Make Ready. We Hunt.Registered User, Moderator mod
    I, too, would like to know what the square root of WOO is. :)

    8i1dt37buh2m.png
  • Options
    beeftruckbeeftruck Registered User regular
    They should just ask the people on Twitter who go around counting ethnicities and getting mad about it to share their algorithm.

  • Options
    Rhesus PositiveRhesus Positive GNU Terry Pratchett Registered User regular
    Hahnsoo1 wrote: »
    I, too, would like to know what the square root of WOO is. :)

    VO

    [Muffled sounds of gorilla violence]
  • Options
    DjiemDjiem Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    I hadn't heard about this "diversity tool" before reading this comic.

    I went to check it out and OOF, it's fucking embarrassing.

    Djiem on
  • Options
    LttlefootLttlefoot Registered User regular
    At least when making the Zerg or the demons in Diablo you can just make whatever scary-looking thing you like

  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    I get why people would look upon anything these AAA gaming companies - and particularly Activision (even though this is a company that Activision swallowed, and hence isn't automatically filled with the same culture) - does. But... I think it might be overblown. Yeah, I know, overreacting to something on the internet. Film at 11.

    https://www.activisionblizzard.com/newsroom/2022/05/king-diversity-space-tool
    How It Works

    The idea of a “tool” to make characters more diverse and inclusive may seem a little hard to wrap your head around. In practice, it has to be more than just, say, a pop-up reminder that between 2017 and 2021 nearly 80% of the highest selling games in the world featured white, male protagonists (according to a study conducted by Diamond Lobby). It needs to become a part of the incubation process from the start, baked into the pipeline as an unmissable and consistent step - which is exactly what this tool was designed to be.

    “The Diversity Space Tool is a measurement device, to help identify how diverse a set of character traits are and in turn how diverse that character and casts are when compared to the ‘norm’,” explains Chomatas. Once it establishes a baseline for typical character traits (which is done by the creative team working closely with DE&I experts), it can then weigh new character designs against it to measure their diversity. During this process, the tool can also uncover unconscious bias, such as why certain traits are seen as “male” vs. “female,” or why characters from certain ethnic backgrounds are given similar personalities or behaviors.

    In this effort, the Diversity Space Tool can clearly delineate between token characters and true representation. “[The tool] identifies what stereotypical characters in different genres look like, which are not always the most conducive or representative of diversity,” says Chomatas. “It helps identify those stereotypes, while also helping creatives look closer at their designs, so they can dissect their own assumptions and presets. It also helps identify opportunities for more diverse character narratives, to ensure that we are not only creating diverse characters in appearance alone.”
    By starting at the character conception stage, the tool allows King and others, to ask these important questions at the earliest possible moment, to promote more thoughtful creative choices from the ground up – which, in turn, leads to games that are more representative of their player base.

    I read this not as it generating a diverse character so much as saying, "Look, this character you just created is a hackneyed stereotype of someone who is _________." I don't think that's a bad idea.

    Yes, they should be more diverse in their hiring practices - including leadership - to avoid this issue. But that's not a panacea. How'd you like to be a Black person in a five person group that has to always be the one arguing for why you think the Black character is kind of a stereotypical one? That's not fun at all. Wouldn't it be great if you could have something to take a bit of the load off there?

    Edit: I will add, though, that the people who decided "we should shout about this to the world!" are fucking idiots.

    dennis on
  • Options
    Rhesus PositiveRhesus Positive GNU Terry Pratchett Registered User regular
    It reminds me of the Community episode where they're trying to create a college mascot with no racial identity whatsoever

    https://youtu.be/8H4KWz1qMSw

    [Muffled sounds of gorilla violence]
  • Options
    Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Is part of the backlash against this because of the idea that Overwatch's more diverse cast was effectively generated by a character creator ruleset instead of organically? I'll admit I've had a bit of trouble understanding why people are upset about this.

    Hexmage-PA on
  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Is part of the backlash against this because of the idea that Overwatch's more diverse cast was effectively generated by a character creator ruleset instead of organically? I'll admit I've had a bit of trouble understanding the backlash against this.

    Possibly part of the reason for the outrage. Though it doesn't seem to have actually been anywhere near the case.





    dennis on
  • Options
    palidine40palidine40 Registered User regular
    The people yelling "atrocity" might not be reading into the details of the thing, so they could be mistaking a middle management tool for a dev tool, or who even knows. They might have their own agenda, or they may want to become popular for other reasons. When one media set (or corporation, even) yells about another, that drums up noise to sell ads on their site just as much as it does to sell ads on the site of the place they're complaining about. By making this into a hot political issue, it increases revenue for the "whistle-blower" as well as for the people that that whistle-blower is complaining about.

    For instance. When fox yells about twitter crushing free speech while twitter influencers yell about fox being tyranically anarcho-capitalist, they're both Not just insulting each other, they're driving each other's ad revenue up. By being an idiot and reading into it deeply, you help each of their causes; or by being an idiot and reading only the surface of it, you help each of their causes; then there's the idiot who doesn't read any of it at all and is just offending both sides.

    We shouldn't be "armies" for anyones cause, otherwise we just heat the flames of an engine too hot and then people die in protests that just promote both side's revenue again. Just be informed enough and realize the story given is probably occluding information for the sake of rage, take it with a grain of salt.


    i REALLY freaking wish we would allow the comments under the gd comics so I didnt have to dig down into the site to have this discussion. I think things like this could help educate the ragers to help gird them against the trolls. Trolls that might be as big as a company or a media these days. The browsing people would have a higher chance of seeing some of our intelligent (and unintelligent) discourse.

  • Options
    Anon von ZilchAnon von Zilch Registered User regular
    I just want to know where I can enter my specs into this, I want to know how well I score!

  • Options
    AsheramAsheram Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Is part of the backlash against this because of the idea that Overwatch's more diverse cast was effectively generated by a character creator ruleset instead of organically? I'll admit I've had a bit of trouble understanding why people are upset about this.

    I believe the outrage is more around them seeming like they're looking for praise for being so diverse, which is against the entire spirit of incorporating diversity.
    Ideally, diversity and inclusion is something that should happen without any outside influence acting upon it, so once they go "Hey, look how inclusive we are. We even came up with a handy scale to show just how inclusive our characters are!" it reeks of disingenuity, thus being seen as just another form of tokenism.

    Asheram on
  • Options
    PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    Wasn't this tool not even used by activision blizzard but actually designed by an outside firm to look at diversity by like actual professors and shit? I swear this feels like CRT all over again where people get like a highly biased hot taek on this and then the actual news is no where near as salacious.

    I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.

    pleasepaypreacher.net
  • Options
    QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    Preacher wrote: »
    Wasn't this tool not even used by activision blizzard but actually designed by an outside firm to look at diversity by like actual professors and shit? I swear this feels like CRT all over again where people get like a highly biased hot taek on this and then the actual news is no where near as salacious.

    They said they did until it blew up in their faces.

    There's a *really* uncomfortable clip of them explaining it at GDC applying it to Mario's cast.

  • Options
    Johnny17Johnny17 Registered User regular
    I'd like to have this for the auto comic generator in the hopes that the panels will be diverse enough to get rid of any remaining traces of sense.

  • Options
    Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Quid wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    Wasn't this tool not even used by activision blizzard but actually designed by an outside firm to look at diversity by like actual professors and shit? I swear this feels like CRT all over again where people get like a highly biased hot taek on this and then the actual news is no where near as salacious.

    They said they did until it blew up in their faces.

    There's a *really* uncomfortable clip of them explaining it at GDC applying it to Mario's cast.

    Is this the one you were talking about, or is it another one? This one mentions Mario characters from about the 21 to 24 minute mark. The presenter seems kind of nervous, but what stood out the most to me is the presumption that the characters are all heterosexual, Toad and Toadette are children, and Mario, Luigi, and Peach are white (Mario and Luigi are supposed to be Italian, but at least Peach could hypothetically be "mukokuseki", which basically means "racially ambiguous").

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZZAHDqdfE

    This video is from 2017, by the way.

    Hexmage-PA on
  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    I just feel that at some recent point, one of the devs that created it said to another, "I TOLD you not to show it to management!"

  • Options
    MichaelLCMichaelLC In what furnace was thy brain? ChicagoRegistered User regular
    edited May 2022
    It's hard to sort the outrage from the actual facts and based on who it is, not really sure I care to, but one impression I got was a phrenology vibe of defining race by bullshit numbers.

    It's (nongendered) techbros thinking they're so smart by "solving" real world issues thru technology without considering actual humans are involved.

    Edit: and OMG that GDC video. You're "presuming they're straight"?
    THAT IS THE BIAS YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO FIX
    .

    MichaelLC on
  • Options
    RatherDashing89RatherDashing89 Registered User regular
    My read is that Activision is trying to show this off as a sign that they are "getting better", and for me, the only "gesture" of that sort that I will accept is Bobby Kotick being fired, and a real acknowledgment of the company's crimes of harassment and abuse. Honestly I'm not sure I'd even take that as being enough; at this point the whole thing probably needs to be dismantled. Which may be unfair, but at this point I can't muster any good will for the company as a whole and any gesture attempting to do so is just going to taste sour to me.

    My other impression is that this feels less like them taking genuine steps to make their work more diverse, and more like them showing off this app to demonstrate how great they already are. "So, in order to make our work more diverse, we came up with this app to see how we're doing. Let's plug a few Overwatch characters into the equation just to test it out. Oh, that's funny...look at how well they are scoring! Hmm, is this calibrated right? Yup, all the settings are good...we must just have really good character diversity! Huh!"

    And I like the Overwatch characters, and I don't think the game itself is guilty of tokenism. But this is quantifying diversity in terms of a graph. The type of graph you use to represent data matters, and they chose a radar chart. This graph type only works for quantifiable factors, values that get larger or smaller. They only really make sense if you are then going to measure the area enclosed and use that as a general idea of how "much" something is, when taking multiple axes into account. So, how much Ethnicity does Lucio have? Because he is plotted somewhere along a line, implying "less ethnicity" and "more ethnicity". Does Torbjorn get more of an Ability score because he has a prosthetic hand and a laser eye? Or....dwarfism?

    Like, this would be very different if it were counting, say, the number of characters that represent minorities represented in a given game. There's value in recognizing the prevalence of white male cishet norms and taking active steps to broaden representation. And that is something you could actually represent in a chart: how many characters in x game diverge from the majority or norm in these different categories. You could actually put that on a radar graph not too different from the Activision one. That would be giving you a sense of how much varied representation there is in a given game. But the current chart only measures "how diverse" a particular character is, which is a concept that makes no sense.

    TL;DR this bothers me on a data visualization level more than anything else. Almost as bad as the unlabeled axes on the graphs in PragerU videos...

  • Options
    RingoRingo He/Him a distinct lack of substanceRegistered User regular
    Sterica wrote: »
    I know my last visit to my grandpa on his deathbed was to find out how the whole Nazi werewolf thing turned out.
    Edcrab's Exigency RPG
  • Options
    H3KnucklesH3Knuckles But we decide which is right and which is an illusion.Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    My other impression is that this feels less like them taking genuine steps to make their work more diverse, and more like them showing off this app to demonstrate how great they already are. "So, in order to make our work more diverse, we came up with this app to see how we're doing. Let's plug a few Overwatch characters into the equation just to test it out. Oh, that's funny...look at how well they are scoring! Hmm, is this calibrated right? Yup, all the settings are good...we must just have really good character diversity! Huh!"

    And I like the Overwatch characters, and I don't think the game itself is guilty of tokenism. But this is quantifying diversity in terms of a graph. The type of graph you use to represent data matters, and they chose a radar chart. This graph type only works for quantifiable factors, values that get larger or smaller. They only really make sense if you are then going to measure the area enclosed and use that as a general idea of how "much" something is, when taking multiple axes into account. So, how much Ethnicity does Lucio have? Because he is plotted somewhere along a line, implying "less ethnicity" and "more ethnicity". Does Torbjorn get more of an Ability score because he has a prosthetic hand and a laser eye? Or....dwarfism?

    Like, this would be very different if it were counting, say, the number of characters that represent minorities represented in a given game. There's value in recognizing the prevalence of white male cishet norms and taking active steps to broaden representation. And that is something you could actually represent in a chart: how many characters in x game diverge from the majority or norm in these different categories. You could actually put that on a radar graph not too different from the Activision one. That would be giving you a sense of how much varied representation there is in a given game. But the current chart only measures "how diverse" a particular character is, which is a concept that makes no sense.

    My impression from what I saw of it was that for most of the people (well, the center to leftist ones) that are upset, it was about the same aspects as Dashing, here.

    I'm also not really sure how this is supposed to represent whether a given character is playing into stereotypes like the statement Dennis quoted from King claims? Look at the axes on the chart, what about that says whether you're making a blaxploitation character or not?

    H3Knuckles on
    If you're curious about my icon; it's an update of the early Lego Castle theme's "Black Falcons" faction.
    camo_sig2-400.png
  • Options
    cynnicysmcynnicysm Registered User regular
    i know this is non-sequitur to the entire rest of this thread but i really only came here to say that "i don't trust X as far as i can throw [it]" is one of my all time favorite idioms.

    it raises so many questions: how is trust measured? how do you convert trust into distance units? is there any accounting for my own throwing prowess? presumably everyone needs their own scale because someone who is a world-record holding shotput thrower, for instance, can throw a given object-of-questionable-trust a lot further than, say, me. but maybe we trust that object the same amount! are babies and the very elderly just...naturally suspicious?!

    but at the same time, it is implicitly understood to mean "i trust this thing very little".

    that kind of dichotomy just gets me. anyway. that's it. it's in the news post if you're confused.

  • Options
    LtPowersLtPowers Registered User regular
    It seems to me this is better thought of as a tool to avoid tokenism and stereotype rather than as a tool to generate diversity. It seems to measure traits relative to either a "white cishet male" baseline or to stereotypes of other (non-white, non-cis, non-heterosexual, or non-masculine) characters.

    For example, if it ended up that all of your Black characters were heterosexual, and all of your bisexual characters were white, that could appear appropriately diverse if you just looked at the individual traits in isolation. But a tool like this could reveal the stereotyping of Black characters as straight and never bi.

    It's not a substitute for hiring diverse team members. But it's not intended to be, either -- and hiring diverse team members doesn't necessarily solve the problem. It's not their job to make sure the product doesn't evince stereotypes; a tool like this offloads some of that responsibility from individuals and puts it on the team as a whole.


    Powers &8^]

  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    H3Knuckles wrote: »
    I'm also not really sure how this is supposed to represent whether a given character is playing into stereotypes like the statement Dennis quoted from King claims? Look at the axes on the chart, what about that says whether you're making a blaxploitation character or not?

    Yeah, the chart - which I found after my post - puzzles me. I do wonder if that was generated as part of the original tool, or a Suggestion from management once they found out about it.

  • Options
    H3KnucklesH3Knuckles But we decide which is right and which is an illusion.Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    As far as I can see from the GDC presentation, the chart is the tool.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZZAHDqdfE
    They talk about the value of avoiding stereotypical designs, but they don't present any methodology for assessing that sort of thing.

    Here's the other main image I can find, which is just the chart with a few more categories (braking ability into cognitive and physical, adding socioeconomic class & facial beauty):
    0b7nod95usyi.jpg

    Edit again: there is this other perspective, which seems to show average scores across the individuals' charts for certain arbitrarily defined groups (alignment, gameplay class, character difficulty, & note the gender binary):
    oj0kcs4hhgs3.jpg

    H3Knuckles on
    If you're curious about my icon; it's an update of the early Lego Castle theme's "Black Falcons" faction.
    camo_sig2-400.png
  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    If I squint, I feel like I can almost see it in that second graph. Like if you could show "look, all our female characters are Good Support people". Or "All our non-white people are Poor or Evil people." I mean, that seems like a thing you don't need a chart to know? But, again, like Melissa Kelly tweeted, "If this creepy chart was made for the executive team to let us do our thing, that might track."

    But to be honest, I look at that chart and I can't draw a single fucking conclusion from what it's trying to show me. Is this... a diverse design? Are you showing me that it's NOT a diverse design?

    dennis on
  • Options
    T-DangerT-Danger Registered User regular
    Asheram wrote: »
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Is part of the backlash against this because of the idea that Overwatch's more diverse cast was effectively generated by a character creator ruleset instead of organically? I'll admit I've had a bit of trouble understanding why people are upset about this.

    I believe the outrage is more around them seeming like they're looking for praise for being so diverse, which is against the entire spirit of incorporating diversity.
    Ideally, diversity and inclusion is something that should happen without any outside influence acting upon it, so once they go "Hey, look how inclusive we are. We even came up with a handy scale to show just how inclusive our characters are!" it reeks of disingenuity, thus being seen as just another form of tokenism.

    What gets me is that outside of Overwatch, what recent ActiBlizz games actually HAVE these diverse casts they're claiming to strive for? Pretty much all the recent Call of Dutys seem to have the same identical grab bag of generic white soldier dudes and women with a few generic people of colour mixed in. And I honestly cannot think of anything else the company has out out with a distinct cast.

  • Options
    TofystedethTofystedeth Registered User regular
    T-Danger wrote: »
    Asheram wrote: »
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Is part of the backlash against this because of the idea that Overwatch's more diverse cast was effectively generated by a character creator ruleset instead of organically? I'll admit I've had a bit of trouble understanding why people are upset about this.

    I believe the outrage is more around them seeming like they're looking for praise for being so diverse, which is against the entire spirit of incorporating diversity.
    Ideally, diversity and inclusion is something that should happen without any outside influence acting upon it, so once they go "Hey, look how inclusive we are. We even came up with a handy scale to show just how inclusive our characters are!" it reeks of disingenuity, thus being seen as just another form of tokenism.

    What gets me is that outside of Overwatch, what recent ActiBlizz games actually HAVE these diverse casts they're claiming to strive for? Pretty much all the recent Call of Dutys seem to have the same identical grab bag of generic white soldier dudes and women with a few generic people of colour mixed in. And I honestly cannot think of anything else the company has out out with a distinct cast.

    Well don't forget King is part of the lineup, so you've got
    Little girl
    Molasses monster
    Bubblegum monster
    Lollipop fairy
    Licorice king

    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    palidine40palidine40 Registered User regular
    Asheram wrote: »
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Is part of the backlash against this because of the idea that Overwatch's more diverse cast was effectively generated by a character creator ruleset instead of organically? I'll admit I've had a bit of trouble understanding why people are upset about this.

    I believe the outrage is more around them seeming like they're looking for praise for being so diverse, which is against the entire spirit of incorporating diversity.
    Ideally, diversity and inclusion is something that should happen without any outside influence acting upon it, so once they go "Hey, look how inclusive we are. We even came up with a handy scale to show just how inclusive our characters are!" it reeks of disingenuity, thus being seen as just another form of tokenism.

    So, Asheram, Blizzard will always be evil, and they'll never be allowed to report on themselves making an effort to get better, even a crappy one like this? Can anyone report on their own efforts to try to become better? Literally every major media corp is going to have a PR department or firm to try to improve their image, and its better if they're telling the truth about what they're doing when they attempt PR, because thing things like this come to light.

  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    palidine40 wrote: »
    Asheram wrote: »
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Is part of the backlash against this because of the idea that Overwatch's more diverse cast was effectively generated by a character creator ruleset instead of organically? I'll admit I've had a bit of trouble understanding why people are upset about this.

    I believe the outrage is more around them seeming like they're looking for praise for being so diverse, which is against the entire spirit of incorporating diversity.
    Ideally, diversity and inclusion is something that should happen without any outside influence acting upon it, so once they go "Hey, look how inclusive we are. We even came up with a handy scale to show just how inclusive our characters are!" it reeks of disingenuity, thus being seen as just another form of tokenism.

    So, Asheram, Blizzard will always be evil, and they'll never be allowed to report on themselves making an effort to get better, even a crappy one like this? Can anyone report on their own efforts to try to become better? Literally every major media corp is going to have a PR department or firm to try to improve their image, and its better if they're telling the truth about what they're doing when they attempt PR, because thing things like this come to light.

    You say "report on", Asheram said "looking for praise." There's a pretty big difference between looking for a pat on the back and saying "we know we're still failing, but here's what we're trying to do to not fail as badly."

    dennis on
  • Options
    palidine40palidine40 Registered User regular
    dennis wrote: »
    If I squint, I feel like I can almost see it in that second graph. Like if you could show "look, all our female characters are Good Support people". Or "All our non-white people are Poor or Evil people." I mean, that seems like a thing you don't need a chart to know? But, again, like Melissa Kelly tweeted, "If this creepy chart was made for the executive team to let us do our thing, that might track."

    But to be honest, I look at that chart and I can't draw a single fucking conclusion from what it's trying to show me. Is this... a diverse design? Are you showing me that it's NOT a diverse design?

    It might not be a pre-design tool, maybe its a tool for determining the situation afterwards, like a heart monitor. Something to help them direct whether they're leaning one way or another, like taking a picture in a moment in time of the situation. And if it doesn't make sense to you, then are you the type of HR, PR, or Psychometrician (yes its a real job) who would normally look at this? Do you do work in those fields to understand this type of output, or to know when its used?

  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    No, I'm not in that field. So yeah, it could be that. Or it could be that these are terrible fucking charts.

  • Options
    RatherDashing89RatherDashing89 Registered User regular
    dennis wrote: »
    No, I'm not in that field. So yeah, it could be that. Or it could be that these are terrible fucking charts.

    Of course you'd say that. You have the brain pan of a stagecoach tilter.

  • Options
    dennisdennis aka bingley Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    dennis wrote: »
    No, I'm not in that field. So yeah, it could be that. Or it could be that these are terrible fucking charts.

    Of course you'd say that. You have the brain pan of a stagecoach tilter.

    You stay away from my lumps. Thems MY lumps!

    dennis on
  • Options
    Hahnsoo1Hahnsoo1 Make Ready. We Hunt.Registered User, Moderator mod
    One of the key failures of the tool is that they assign actual quantitative digits to qualitative attributes. This person gets a 4 in Physical Ability (their euphemism for Handicap) because they have one eye! (This is the actual example) 7 points in Culture for being Egyptian! (Same example)

    Austin Walker put it best, I think:
    bjgpvwkjhz4v.png

    In stuff like this, you don't actually get an A for effort.

    8i1dt37buh2m.png
  • Options
    LttlefootLttlefoot Registered User regular
    You can also change the area on a polar chart by rearranging the axes (for eg if someone is high on two measures that are placed opposite each other then it makes a thin triangle)

  • Options
    tastydonutstastydonuts Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    Really want to point out that Activision's PR team kinda screwed this up with their timing and this is the kind of thing that really doesn't belong as a blast to a general audience because of the bias on the matter too. Diversity analytics (yeah, I am repeating things I've already said in other threads about this tool) are not a bad thing. The tool itself and the general concept of quantifiably measuring diversity is not a bad thing. Without an actual measurement to display change, there's only just opinions and feels really. Equality (typically via quotas, which are still necessary) and equity are not the same thing. This principle of equity can be applied to this tool wherein its purpose seems to be to avoid stereotypes and tokenism in portraying a character.

    The ranges that they used to quantify these buckets was stated to not just be pulled out their asses, so much as they worked in conjunction with DEI experts and such. DEI experts are focused on diversity, equity and inclusion and such. So the definitions aren't just coming from a complete vacuum, or at least not one consisting of people not versed diversity.

    Furthermore, when you consider which part of Activision created the tool, King, they as a have very consistently pushed diversity and ensuring diversity and all those things over the years. This tool was started back in 2016. On Glassdoor's 5 point diversity rating scale, King has a 3.9 rating. The extent to which their company's culture seems to be focused on diversity such that they would make a tool like this is also very high. Over the years they've gone very big and publicly into diversity as a culture (or a facade thereof, if we ant to be a cynical :P). But here's just some of the articles dropped over time regarding their activity:

    2017 article re Diversity from King's diversity person
    Case Study of their diversity efforts using mentoring software
    Desirée Brathwaite, Candy Crush producer on diversity, 2020.
    Interview about Crash Bandicoot that also digs into diversity and King

    So for the people who made this tool and who spent time off hours and whatnot working on it, this was a project-project. But to Activision, it was an "opportunity" of a different sort? Though the more I think about it, given the level of enthusiasm they have on this, it's likely that they just posted this out and really failed the to read the room because diversity analytics and the like are a rather touchy thing. So maybe this isn't Activision proper's whole fault. IDK.

    tastydonuts on
    “I used to draw, hard to admit that I used to draw...”
  • Options
    TofystedethTofystedeth Registered User regular
    edited May 2022
    In mild defense of the chart, it's also easy when you're developing characters one or two at a time over the course of several years to unintentionally stack things in a particular way. Like, if you try and make sure that you stay roughly balanced with male and female characters but the cadence is such that "we need to make another female character" and "the next character is a healer" line up several times then you might find that over course of 5 years you've added 3 female healers and one male, thus reinforcing a stereotype.
    It's good to say just have a diverse staff and listen to them, but it's easy to miss the forest for the trees is that staff is looking at their individual components and not the whole and various slices of the whole.

    Tofystedeth on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    DjiemDjiem Registered User regular
    In mild defense of the chart, it's also easy when you're developing characters one or two at a time over the course of several years to unintentionally stack things in a particular way. Like, if you try and make sure that you stay roughly balanced with male and female characters but the cadence is such that "we need to make another female character" and "the next character is a healer" line up several times then you might find that over course of 5 years you've added 3 female healers and one male, thus reinforcing a stereotype.
    It's good to say just have a diverse staff and listen to them, but it's easy to miss the forest for the trees is that staff is looking at their individual components and not the whole and various slices of the whole.

    That's fair. I feel like a lot of the outrage, including part of my own "OOF" is that Blizzard/Activision is a huge corporation trying to make tons of money, like many others, and often via methods of discutable ethics. So when you see them show a chart or tool that quantifies human experiences and identities, there's definitely a visceral reaction; it feels disingenuous, like a bunch of suits going: "How do we attract the urban market?"

    It just feels a little gross.

Sign In or Register to comment.