Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Squigsquasher: Racism through exclusion is just as disheartening as racism through offensive imagery.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
How do you keep equality without the overall story of the game turning into a checklist for representing every gender, orientation and race equally?

Simple. Decide what the intended perspective is at the beginning of the game-- or perspectives, if you wish. Then tell the story from that perspective. If you want it to be a black guy in an inner city, go with it. If you want it to be an Afghani lady trying to survive the chaos in her homeland, go with that. But don't force it to always try to be "the white guy".

This isn't a suggestion for a quota, no matter how hysterically certain fearmongers might be trying to claim it is. There's no numbers here. Simply a request for "more"-- more believable, well-developed minority characters, who are presented in a serious fashion, and who have a bigger effect on the story or even are the lead characters themselves.

Basically, a different perspective than the droll "bald white guy" one that is shat out on almost every game even when the developers initially wanted to do something else. Actually, you know what? That reminds me. One big idea would be to simply STOP MAKING DEVELOPERS CHANGE THEIR CHARACTERS TO MIDDLE AGED WHITE GUYS ALREADY GODDAMNIT. Even just letting developers make the stories they want to make with less editorial interference would result in more diversity than we currently have.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Moreover, how do you keep the story feeling organic and not constructed?

Are you suggesting that they are successful in doing that right now?

Because I certainly would STRONGLY disagree.

 Melissia wrote:
Squigsquasher: Racism through exclusion is just as disheartening as racism through offensive imagery.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
How do you keep equality without the overall story of the game turning into a checklist for representing every gender, orientation and race equally?

Simple. Decide what the intended perspective is at the beginning of the game-- or perspectives, if you wish. Then tell the story from that perspective. If you want it to be a black guy in an inner city, go with it. If you want it to be an Afghani lady trying to survive the chaos in her homeland, go with that. But don't force it to always try to be "the white guy".

This isn't a suggestion for a quota, no matter how hysterically certain fearmongers might be trying to claim it is. There's no numbers here. Simply a request for "more"-- more believable, well-developed minority characters, who are presented in a serious fashion, and who have a bigger effect on the story or even are the lead characters themselves.

Basically, a different perspective than the droll "bald white guy" one that is shat out on almost every game even when the developers initially wanted to do something else. Actually, you know what? That reminds me. One big idea would be to simply STOP MAKING DEVELOPERS CHANGE THEIR CHARACTERS TO MIDDLE AGED WHITE GUYS ALREADY GODDAMNIT. Even just letting developers make the stories they want to make with less editorial interference would result in more diversity than we currently have.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Moreover, how do you keep the story feeling organic and not constructed?

Are you suggesting that they are successful in doing that right now?

Because I certainly would STRONGLY disagree.

Then couldn't that be accused of being discriminatory against middle age white guys since they are being specifically singled out?

Yeah, a lot of games currently don't have a great story. But I honestly can't stand the idea of diversity for the sake of diversity without at least a story based reason to explain why its like that, otherwise it appears to be just more Political PC nonsense. Race shouldn't be the focus of any story, the story should, otherwise regardless of intention it becomes very discriminatory.

The only way to achieve equality without discriminating against anyone IS quotas.

I think in about five years time this will stop being an issue due to public outcry and Kickstarter.

Nobody thought a Torment Sequel would sell well, and yet that raised millions in days.

Everyone thought Adventure games were dead, and then Double Fine came along and proved they were still marketable.




All it's going to take is some reputable company getting sick of the Publishers Bull Poo and going on Kickstarter. I guarantee it would be funded solely on it's diverse lead (which let's be honest, people jumping on the game SOLELY for that reason causes it's own kind of problems, such as quality assurance and the like). Kickstarter has been the best thing to happen to the industry so far, if you ask me.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Squigsquasher: Racism through exclusion is just as disheartening as racism through offensive imagery.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
How do you keep equality without the overall story of the game turning into a checklist for representing every gender, orientation and race equally?

Simple. Decide what the intended perspective is at the beginning of the game-- or perspectives, if you wish. Then tell the story from that perspective. If you want it to be a black guy in an inner city, go with it. If you want it to be an Afghani lady trying to survive the chaos in her homeland, go with that. But don't force it to always try to be "the white guy".

This isn't a suggestion for a quota, no matter how hysterically certain fearmongers might be trying to claim it is. There's no numbers here. Simply a request for "more"-- more believable, well-developed minority characters, who are presented in a serious fashion, and who have a bigger effect on the story or even are the lead characters themselves.

Basically, a different perspective than the droll "bald white guy" one that is shat out on almost every game even when the developers initially wanted to do something else. Actually, you know what? That reminds me. One big idea would be to simply STOP MAKING DEVELOPERS CHANGE THEIR CHARACTERS TO MIDDLE AGED WHITE GUYS ALREADY GODDAMNIT. Even just letting developers make the stories they want to make with less editorial interference would result in more diversity than we currently have.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Moreover, how do you keep the story feeling organic and not constructed?

Are you suggesting that they are successful in doing that right now?

Because I certainly would STRONGLY disagree.

Then couldn't that be accused of being discriminatory against middle age white guys since they are being specifically singled out?

Yeah, a lot of games currently don't have a great story. But I honestly can't stand the idea of diversity for the sake of diversity without at least a story based reason to explain why its like that, otherwise it appears to be just more Political PC nonsense.

The only way to achieve equality without discriminating against anyone IS quotas.

So minorities need a "story based reason to explain" their inclusion? Why can't they just be? Straight-white-male never needs and explanation for his existence, yet we have to have some special prerequisites to include anyone else? Seems silly.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Squigsquasher: Racism through exclusion is just as disheartening as racism through offensive imagery.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
How do you keep equality without the overall story of the game turning into a checklist for representing every gender, orientation and race equally?

Simple. Decide what the intended perspective is at the beginning of the game-- or perspectives, if you wish. Then tell the story from that perspective. If you want it to be a black guy in an inner city, go with it. If you want it to be an Afghani lady trying to survive the chaos in her homeland, go with that. But don't force it to always try to be "the white guy".

This isn't a suggestion for a quota, no matter how hysterically certain fearmongers might be trying to claim it is. There's no numbers here. Simply a request for "more"-- more believable, well-developed minority characters, who are presented in a serious fashion, and who have a bigger effect on the story or even are the lead characters themselves.

Basically, a different perspective than the droll "bald white guy" one that is shat out on almost every game even when the developers initially wanted to do something else. Actually, you know what? That reminds me. One big idea would be to simply STOP MAKING DEVELOPERS CHANGE THEIR CHARACTERS TO MIDDLE AGED WHITE GUYS ALREADY GODDAMNIT. Even just letting developers make the stories they want to make with less editorial interference would result in more diversity than we currently have.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Moreover, how do you keep the story feeling organic and not constructed?

Are you suggesting that they are successful in doing that right now?

Because I certainly would STRONGLY disagree.

Then couldn't that be accused of being discriminatory against middle age white guys since they are being specifically singled out?

Yeah, a lot of games currently don't have a great story. But I honestly can't stand the idea of diversity for the sake of diversity without at least a story based reason to explain why its like that, otherwise it appears to be just more Political PC nonsense.

The only way to achieve equality without discriminating against anyone IS quotas.

I don't mean to sound rude, but you're making it sound like we have to screw over the white guy in order to give the colored guy a chance.

Going back to the film industry, did Will Smith steal the show from Vin Deisal? Or Sigourney Weaver from Ahnold? No, but it's really nice to see some multi-backgrounded action stars. Zorro is just a timeless classic as Robin Hood. Also, imagine never having seen Jet Li's portrayals of his native Folk Heroes, those have always been interesting.

Now imagine never having seen Zorro, since you COULD NOT have a Hispanic lead. Seems kinda silly to have a white guy as a Mexican hero, don't you think?


Also, How much better could Homefront have been, if the main character was a Korean-American? He's clearly on the American Side, but people distrust him in a time of war due to his nationality (Which is EXACTLY what happened to the Japanese Americans in WWII). Would have made for a much better story.

 asimo77 wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Squigsquasher: Racism through exclusion is just as disheartening as racism through offensive imagery.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
How do you keep equality without the overall story of the game turning into a checklist for representing every gender, orientation and race equally?

Simple. Decide what the intended perspective is at the beginning of the game-- or perspectives, if you wish. Then tell the story from that perspective. If you want it to be a black guy in an inner city, go with it. If you want it to be an Afghani lady trying to survive the chaos in her homeland, go with that. But don't force it to always try to be "the white guy".

This isn't a suggestion for a quota, no matter how hysterically certain fearmongers might be trying to claim it is. There's no numbers here. Simply a request for "more"-- more believable, well-developed minority characters, who are presented in a serious fashion, and who have a bigger effect on the story or even are the lead characters themselves.

Basically, a different perspective than the droll "bald white guy" one that is shat out on almost every game even when the developers initially wanted to do something else. Actually, you know what? That reminds me. One big idea would be to simply STOP MAKING DEVELOPERS CHANGE THEIR CHARACTERS TO MIDDLE AGED WHITE GUYS ALREADY GODDAMNIT. Even just letting developers make the stories they want to make with less editorial interference would result in more diversity than we currently have.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Moreover, how do you keep the story feeling organic and not constructed?

Are you suggesting that they are successful in doing that right now?

Because I certainly would STRONGLY disagree.

Then couldn't that be accused of being discriminatory against middle age white guys since they are being specifically singled out?

Yeah, a lot of games currently don't have a great story. But I honestly can't stand the idea of diversity for the sake of diversity without at least a story based reason to explain why its like that, otherwise it appears to be just more Political PC nonsense.

The only way to achieve equality without discriminating against anyone IS quotas.

So minorities need a "story based reason to explain" their inclusion? Why can't they just be? Straight-white-male never needs and explanation for his existence, yet we have to have some special prerequisites to inlude anyone else? Seems silly.

It depends on how its presented. A good example of this is Aliens vs Predator, the 2010 version. In the marine campain, the 'Rookie', the player character, was Black.

But it never really came up in the story that he was black, nor was a big story or plot point. (Same with the white protagonist in the previous version). Its the perfect example of race done properly in video games. No special snowflakes and is able to welcome anyone of any race in. Now, if only they did the same thing in the next one, with a female character, without her gender being a plot device or other garbage like that.

What I'm arguing against is games where the protagonist group JUST SO HAPPENS to have formed into an absolute-perfect amalgamation of minority groups. Is there a sense of realism to this?

Now imagine never having seen Zorro, since you COULD NOT have a Hispanic lead. Seems kinda silly to have a white guy as a Mexican hero, don't you think?

Does that mean white guys can't be a resident of mexico? Regardless, Zorro is an example done right. Hes a hero, hes the protagonist, and it isn't because of his race, but his actions instead.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Then couldn't that be accused of being discriminatory against middle age white guys since they are being specifically singled out?

No.

You're black in AvP!
I didn't know that...

No.

You hate it when developers say "Choose only White Middle aged guy as the protagonist"

But you don't hate it when they say "Choose any race/gender except White middle aged guy as the protagonist".

How is that not hypocritical? Its discrimination both ways.

You're black in AvP!
I didn't know that...

Yeah, its never really brought up in the story. The aliens universe has always been probably the best way for equality to be done right.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
...What I'm arguing against is games where the protagonist group JUST SO HAPPENS to have formed into an absolute-perfect amalgamation of minority groups. Is there a sense of realism to this?...

I can't speak for your part of Britain, but in the US, absolutely.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

No.

You hate it when developers say "Choose only White Middle aged guy as the protagonist"

But you don't hate it when they say "Choose any race/gender except White middle aged guy as the protagonist".

How is that not hypocritical? Its discrimination both ways.

You're black in AvP!
I didn't know that...

Yeah, its never really brought up in the story. The aliens universe has always been probably the best way for equality to be done right.

I didn't even know that though...
There's one thing for not bringing up a person's race as part of a story but it's another thing not to even know it...
Actually that character was pretty damn faceless...

I didn't even know that though...
There's one thing for not bringing up a person's race as part of a story but it's another thing not to even know it...
Actually that character was pretty damn faceless...

As it should be. True equality is the elimination of race and gender.

That said, the story compared to the previous games or the aliens movie was a bit weak...

To explain my answer of "no", since invariably you'll ask me to, I'll give you some reading material. I do not feel like putting any more time and effort in to that tired, trollish, worthless old argument than simply tossing these at you.

"Why do you hate [Non-minority group]?"
"What is privilege?"
"Isn't [movement] exclusionary"?

While these links are specific to feminism, similar arguments apply equally to your objections to civil rights and equal treatment movements for minorities in general. That question is inane, and I have nothing more that I am willing to add in the context of this forum.

While these links are specific to feminism, similar arguments apply equally to your objections to civil rights and equal treatment movements for minorities in general.

I'm not against equal treatment. I'm against all forms of discrimination. Big difference.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
I'm not against equal treatment.

I do not believe you, as you are arguing against equal treatment.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Now imagine never having seen Zorro, since you COULD NOT have a Hispanic lead. Seems kinda silly to have a white guy as a Mexican hero, don't you think?

Does that mean white guys can't be a resident of mexico? Regardless, Zorro is an example done right. Hes a hero, hes the protagonist, and it isn't because of his race, but his actions instead.

No, but I highly doubt that a lot of Hispanics (in the movie) would see Zorro himself (As brash and out in the open that he is) as a symbol of hope if he were white.

Imagine in a game/movie where humans are slaves to aliens. Would humanity see an Alien "Freedom Fighter" as a savior, or as someone who want to be the one holding the chains, so to speak?

I agree with him being a great example, naturally. I just don't think he could have been near what he was/is if a white guy was forced into the role.

Mr Hyena wrote:

No.

You hate it when developers say "Choose only White Middle aged guy as the protagonist"

But you don't hate it when they say "Choose any race/gender except White middle aged guy as the protagonist".

The problem with that is that no one who gives you a choice is going to cut out a major playerbase. No game with a choice has ever said "Choose any race/gender except black middle aged guy" either.

I do not believe you, as you are arguing against equal treatment.

When there is no gender and no race, theres no discrimination against anyone, because everyone is equal. It really is the next stage of human evolution.

I agree with him being a great example, naturally. I just don't think he could have been near what he was/is if a white guy was forced into the role.

Its a difficult area, because it most definitely is a slippery slope. To achieve equality, there needs to be a sense where everyone can be involved. We shouldn't get to the stage where we should say "This race isn't suitable" because that leads to discriminatory behaviour.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and all that.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
When there is no gender and no race, theres no discrimination against anyone, because everyone is equal.

There's a difference between everyone being equal because there is no gender or race and people being equal and not discriminated against despite gender or race...

 Mr Hyena wrote:
When there is no gender and no race, theres no discrimination against anyone, because everyone is equal.

Gender and race issues have never been successfully removed from media except in the eyes of those who never really experienced them in the first place.

 purplefood wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
When there is no gender and no race, theres no discrimination against anyone, because everyone is equal.

There's a difference between everyone being equal because there is no gender or race and people being equal and not discriminated against despite gender or race...

But the conundrum is how to achieve that without just reversing the discrimination on its head.

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 purplefood wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
When there is no gender and no race, theres no discrimination against anyone, because everyone is equal.

There's a difference between everyone being equal because there is no gender or race and people being equal and not discriminated against despite gender or race...

But the conundrum is how to achieve that without just reversing the discrimination on its head.

Treat everyone as equal.
You don't need to include people of all races and creed just don't make your entire super force delta squad all white guys with one token black guy...

Mr Hyena wrote:When there is no gender and no race, theres no discrimination against anyone, because everyone is equal.

Equal how? What gender/race will we make each and every NPC? Will they all be blobs?

Idealistically, I somewhat agree with you; we shouldn't have to worry about this; everyone should be treated the same regardless of who they are and where they come from. Realistically, we do, and so we need to actually do something about it.

Mr Hyena wrote:

While these links are specific to feminism, similar arguments apply equally to your objections to civil rights and equal treatment movements for minorities in general.

I'm not against equal treatment. I'm against all forms of discrimination. Big difference.

"Reverse" Discrimination is hiring someone solely because they are a minority, despite the white guy being more qualified to work the job (Which is happening more than you would think, at least around me).

However, Discrimination is simply saying "You can't be here because you're XYZ", and is exactly what's happening in the gaming industry. Nobody is up for shoe-horning minorities into roles they SHOULDN'T play (Bioshock Infinite would be TERRIBLE with a Black Lead, for instance), but would it kill Call of Duty, Halo, or similar to have a black/female protagonist?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 purplefood wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:

 purplefood wrote:

 Mr Hyena wrote:
When there is no gender and no race, theres no discrimination against anyone, because everyone is equal.

There's a difference between everyone being equal because there is no gender or race and people being equal and not discriminated against despite gender or race...

But the conundrum is how to achieve that without just reversing the discrimination on its head.

Treat everyone as equal.
You don't need to include people of all races and creed just don't make your entire super force delta squad all white guys with one token black guy...

Hate to go off topic, but it PISSES ME OFF what they did to Tyrone in the transition from Comic to TV Series in the Walking Dead. He was my favorite character too, despite being a bit of a stereotype himself..... Now he literally is "Token Black Guy".

Oftentimes, "reverse discrimination" is nothing more than a desperate shout by people who want to keep going on having more than everyone else. It may sound overly dismissive, but again, I recommend you read the link I posted about privilege. The term causes some people to rage, no doubt, but it describes a very real (and sadly common) phenomenon throughout the various societies of the world.

Here's some examples:



To change it from feminism to general racial equality-- if a black guy gets a lead role in a big budget production, many people claim that this is racism and oppressing the white guy... even when (as it usually is) the white guy gets lead roles 95 out of 100 times in similar productions. It is a stupid and disgusting attitude by lazy, ignorant people.

Treat everyone as equal.
You don't need to include people of all races and creed just don't make your entire super force delta squad all white guys with one token black guy...

Less discriminative, but still very exclusionary.

Equal how? What gender/race will we make each and every NPC? Will they all be blobs?

Deus Ex and Ghost in the Shell touch on it. Cybernetic augmentation will be the catalyst for the removal of gender and race due to the inherent nature of technology. Robots lack any sort of race or gender unless designed to.

Thats an idealism to work towards.

but would it kill Call of Duty, Halo, or similar to have a black/female protagonist?

I'm sure it certainly could have one.

It may sound overly dismissive, but again, I recommend you read the link I posted about privilege

I did. Good intentions, but its tarnished by the 'us' and 'them' approach. Men against women or women against men, it doesn't matter. What matters is including both.

if a black guy gets a lead role in a big budget production, many people claim that this is racism and oppressing the white guy... even when (as it usually is) the white guy gets lead roles 95 out of 100 times in similar productions.

There will probably be alot of that happening.

But...did he get the role because he was skilled at it? or just because he was black? Did the other guy get rejected because he was white? oftentimes the end result doesn't matter, but HOW it got there does.

 Mr Hyena wrote:
Good intentions, but its tarnished by the 'us' and 'them' approach.

No it's not. Go read the third link I provided.

Melissia wrote:Oftentimes, "reverse discrimination" is nothing more than a desperate shout by people who want to keep going on having more than everyone else. It may sound overly dismissive, but again, I recommend you read the link I posted about privilege. The term causes some people to rage, no doubt, but it describes a very real (and sadly common) phenomenon throughout the various societies of the world.

I'll have to read it later, replying one quick time before me friends get here to go work out.

Having said that, you can't tell me that if you have two people whom are equally qualified for a position, one's white (has a wife and kids he has to support) and the other's black (Single, no kids), and you go with the black person solely because he's black and the state will give you benefits on taxes for having a more diverse work force, that that isn't discrimination.

You simply can't.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Treat everyone as equal.
You don't need to include people of all races and creed just don't make your entire super force delta squad all white guys with one token black guy...

Less discriminative, but still very exclusionary.

Equal how? What gender/race will we make each and every NPC? Will they all be blobs?

Deus Ex and Ghost in the Shell touch on it. Cybernetic augmentation will be the catalyst for the removal of gender and race due to the inherent nature of technology. Robots lack any sort of race or gender unless designed to.

Thats an idealism to work towards.

but would it kill Call of Duty, Halo, or similar to have a black/female protagonist?

I'm sure it certainly could have one.

I'm sorry, but I don't want to lose my favorite digit just to get a robotic arm. As much as I want a robotic arm, there are some prices I'm just not willing to pay.

Also, the fact that CoD, which has had games come out yearly since...... 2004? I believe hasn't featured one lead that isn't a white male is pretty representative of how bad off we are in this department.

I'm sorry, but I don't want to lose my favorite digit just to get a robotic arm. As much as I want a robotic arm, there are some prices I'm just not willing to pay.

It won't be for a LONG time till something like the described comes about. Its just too 'out-there' by current standards.

 Slarg232 wrote:
I'll have to read it later, replying one quick time before me friends get here to go work out.

Having said that, you can't tell me that if you have two people whom are equally qualified for a position, one's white (has a wife and kids he has to support) and the other's black (Single, no kids), and you go with the black person solely because he's black and the state will give you benefits on taxes for having a more diverse work force, that that isn't discrimination.

You simply can't.

In that situation, nothing that they can do will be non-discriminatory save for hiring both of them-- which is rarely an option. But hiring the black worker would be less discriminatory for most companies. Also more beneficial to the company, especially if the company has a diversity problem (and I haven't seen very many companies that don't, especially big companies).

Conversely, a company that has very few white workers would benefit more from hiring the white worker, to add more diverse voices and experiences. Those companies are few and far between, however. Keep in mind, both of these statements are simply pragmatic views taking in to account what the two otherwise equally skilled workers can bring to the company. It is rare that companies actually think like this.

Many times, hirees are chosen simply because the recruiter likes them more, whatever the differences in qualifications. Ergo, a white male recruiter (and most of them are white and male) is far more likely to recruit a white interviewee who has similar experiences with them and thus who he is more likely to be more comfortable with and get along with quicker, than the black interviewee, whom the interviewer is more likely to be more uncomfortable around.

Or to put it more bluntly-- for quite a few companies, it matters more who you know than what your actual qualifications are. Two of the four jobs I've held since becoming an adult I obtained because I was a friend of someone in the company. With the economic crisis and the massive youth unemployment hte world is going through, it's becoming more and more difficult to obtain a job without knowing someone in the company, especially for minorities.

Curse you and you're learnedness, Mel. Curse you to the deepest depths of the Warp XD

 Mr Hyena wrote:

While these links are specific to feminism, similar arguments apply equally to your objections to civil rights and equal treatment movements for minorities in general.

I'm not against equal treatment. I'm against all forms of discrimination. Big difference.

So are you against meritocracy? The economy? Life as a whole?

Everything is different, everything has certain levels of discrimination. You can be positive in discrimination as well.