Riposte
Member
The classic moral dilemma: if you could go back in time to before Hitler became fuhrer, would you pirate Mein Kampf?
Games ruined by creator's politics
- Thread starter FlyinJ
- Start date
The classic moral dilemma: if you could go back in time to before Hitler became fuhrer, would you pirate Mein Kampf?
Iva Demilcol
Member
Unfortunately I already bought FEZ, but I know better now and won't make the mistake of buying a Phil Fish game ever again.
The thing is games are made by such large groups of people these days theres bound to be someone part of that dev team that you dont agree with.. Every major AAA game probably has some racist homophobic person on the payroll. Its just not public like a few more well known artist.
Just because he dosnt like modern Japanese games?
Them be some hardcore political views lol..
Just because he dosnt like modern Japanese games?
Them be some hardcore political views lol..
The problem becomes much harder to swallow when you are giving money to someone who then uses it to champion horrible causes. In this case, to deny Japanese war crimes.
You may as well never spend money again.
He's Canadian, dosnt like modern Japanese games and says mean things to people who attack him on Twitter...
He's pretty much the Antichrist of gaming.
im not a progressive (consider myself center left) and very much against marxist and critical theory based ideologies in general. these kinds of ideologies are very much in the zeitgeist at the moment and therefore have found their way into all kinds of art and media. i dont think its ever stopped me from enjoying content that i would have otherwise enjoyed . it does sometimes make me wonder if there is a place on for someone like me on gaf tho.
I don't think this is the case. I think it's probably very easy to spend money on things that do not actively promote hateful ideologies. People make bad choices sometimes and there are unintended consequences of particular actions and perspectives. There's no utility, though, in handwaving away someone who actively promotes negative outcomes. I feel pretty confident I bought bread this morning, for example, without giving my money to someone who spent money on Prop 8, for example.
A lot of people are confusing the idea of political ideals and agendas with just being a jerk.
Because Phil Fish is kind of a jerk. But his politics are very much in line with the majority of the rest of the country.
As for me, yeah the Chair stuff with Orsen Scott Card. Dropped 50 bucks on an LGBTQ organization after I bought Advent Rising. Did it again for Shadow Complex.
I like a lot of stuff Card has done, but I'm not going to pretend like he's not socially and morally wrong.
I never considered that...
From this point forward in just going to blindly consume everything with zero empathy or consideration towards any implication caused by my actions
You've really opened my eyes, thanks!
Some people have no shame.
charlequin
Banned
I dunno, maybe because you're a mature adult who understands and considers the way that your own actions and those of others intersect to influence and shape society and as such apply some form of ethical reasoning to things like spending money, rather than a child who doesn't think of anything beyond personal gratification? I mean, just a thought.
On second thought, maybe not.
cryptosporidium
Member
Hmm the Mother series specifically Mother 3 might be interesting for you then. Its a criticism of liberal individualism/capitalism and instead aims to showthe benefits of a regressed communal based monarchy/marxist community. (theres a monarch but I dont recall the royals actually doing much, as well as the community lives off of controlled anarchy which many myself included would argue to be the purist form of communism.)
He's probably gay himself and just hates it way too much.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Is this meant to serve as an example of what you were complaining about earlier this week in this post:
That is, you providing a bad post on gaming side GAF.
Every human being has flaws. Not every human being is some dark monster with skeletons in the closet.
In regards to the overall subject, how I let the person influence my decision to buy their products depends upon their views, their actions, and their visibility/proximity to the project's success, and these three things can override one another depending upon their severity. A person with excessively deplorable views about black people can repulse me enough to not buy, even if they don't have a high-ranking position in the company. A director or producer who pisses me off with something less offensive (Naughty Dog's dismissal of cartoony games) can make me not want to buy as well. It depends upon the interplay of these qualities and the issues that are close to my heart.
I also don't see refraining from purchasing a product on the basis of philosophical or political differences as "punishing" anyone. I am not obligated, much less capable, of giving my money to every single person on the market who has a product of some sort of standard regardless. The default state of a consumer is one of pickiness and choosiness, and as a result I deny buying media for a lot less and no one seems to give a crap about it then. Am I "punishing" Turn 10 for merely not being enthused by car sims? No. Am I "punishing" Nintendo for not simply being financially capable of buying Wii U game I want this instant? No. So why am I and others being guilt-tripped about not wanting to give my money to an asshole because that will "punish the good people"? No one is entitled to the money I work for regardless, and honestly I wish the culture felt the same way about their own funds because we will let game companies get away with murder, all to buy the next AAA travesty.
Now, I don't buy a whole lot of games on the regular so I'm not versed in the political views of most developers anyway. I think the most I've denied buying or partaking in a game is on the basis of corporate decisions rather than moral ones, and that's just a result of my own ignorance (if you guys could stop shoehorning debilitating microtransactions into games, that would be greeeaaat). Also, most of the people who have been revealed to have shitty social views I never would've bought their games anyway out of disinterest in the material.
NoblesseOblige
Banned
Generally speaking i am in the "separate art from artist" camp, however i also believe that sometimes being a flawed (or outright horrible) human being may be part of what makes their art so fascinating and interesting, if we see art as a way to peer into some else's psyche (the artist).
So in that sense, separating art and artist is an illusion, but in a larger sense, appreciating said art doesn't imply condoning, let alone embracing, the actions or thoughts of the person behind it.
I also think that even the most horrible person in the world is multifaceted, and not everything they produce comes from the same place within them, necessarily.
So in that sense, separating art and artist is an illusion, but in a larger sense, appreciating said art doesn't imply condoning, let alone embracing, the actions or thoughts of the person behind it.
I also think that even the most horrible person in the world is multifaceted, and not everything they produce comes from the same place within them, necessarily.
Pinko Marx
Banned
What has Stardock done?
Palette Swap
Member
Honestly, dude, that sounds condescending as hell. I don't see the wisdom in telling people to grow out of being uncomfortable if they feel they're ultimately supporting a Japanese war crimes apologist.
I mean, we all have our red lines. If anything, I'd say maturity lies in accepting that everyone has theirs, grounded in their opinions, their history, their sensibilities. There's nothing wrong with saying "I'm uncomfortable with this and would rather avoid it". Particularly in a world of entertainment oversaturation where you were never going to play/watch/read everything anyway.
You write this like there aren't a gazillion gaming threads that never touch politics.
This is probably my ignorance speaking, but I don't see how this relates to Marxism TBH.
charlequin
Banned
To be fair, Division has two kind of looters. Those who loot locations and vehicles etc. you can't shoot them. Then there are looters who loot the pockets of their killed victims, those you can shoot. Even before they open fire at you, what they will do when they notice you.
charlequin
Banned
I don't know why people think this is a compelling argument. Recast this into any kind of everyday situation and it's clear how absurd it is:
A: They found a human finger in a burrito at this restaurant.
B: Well, food gets contaminated everywhere.
A: I just don't want to eat at places where there was an actual human body part in the food.
B: You might as well never go out to eat again!
ViewtifulJC
Banned
the better debate is whether the art is more interesting coming from artist that dont 100% line up with your political viewpoint.
Like Clint Eastwood is the textbook old conservative gun-loving Trump voter everybody on GAF hates cuz we're all smarty pants liberal types, but he's also made some really good movies. Movies that even showcase his politically conservative tendencies. I find that fascinating, personally. Like "I dont agree with you, but I admire the way you've made your argument!"
That example doesnt seem to be ethical in nature, more of a direct health hazard.
Like buying a game that would erase your hard drive or some such.
Lionel Richie
Member
I don't really think being able to distinguish a work from its creator is a maturity issue.
The thing is, you're not ultimately supporting Japanese war crime apologism. Are the games used as ideological vehicles? Are the profits from the sales going to fund propaganda? Will strong DQ sales fuel ultranationalism and inspire more people to think like Sugiyama?
No? Then I think it's reasonable to try to separate the work from the creator's political ideas. You're not paying for his politics, you're paying for his game.
lmao
No, not every "great" person actively denies Japan's rape of Nanking.
It's one thing to enjoy something from someone awful and another to reward said person for it.
It more boils down to the fact that some people just don't give a fuck if their actions have an effect on anyone else.
No, it's about drawing the line in different places and not having the arrogance to think the place you draw it at, is the moral absolute.
Personally i am ok with people boycotting whatever they want for whatever reason, i won't get on the high horse because i get why they do it and i think it's a fair reasoning, even though i personally don't feel the same way.
entremet
Member
Ok, so what does he believe?
You don't have a problem giving money to help fund Japanese war crime denial. I do.
Where does your moral line get drawn?
charlequin
Banned
I think responding to this topic by saying that you separate these things and that with open eyes you choose not to avoid works by creators with terrible beliefs is perfectly mature and fairly supportable. I think boggling at the idea and being unable to imagine why anyone might ever think about the ethics of artistic creators is childish, especially combined with complaining over creators inserting political content into their works.
I understand the point that you're trying to make, but in this case very specifically the answer to the latter two questions is "yes." Sugiyama is one of the primary copyright holders on the Dragon Quest property and is very explicit about using his wealth from that to fund organizations that produce propaganda on the topic.
See my edit.
I don't have a problem with your boycotting either.
I'm giving money for the game, not for war crimes denial.
What people use their personal money for, is a separate issue for me.
Iva Demilcol
Member
Some people already mentioned devs like Molineaux and Sean Murray in the first page. OP didn't even mention this was exclusive to real life politics; Politics regarding the gaming industry are still politics so my point doesn't change: he's an asshole that I won't support, that's all.
Thus, you don't give a fuck about how you spend your money will effect other people.
At least you are explicit and acknowledge it.
Psychoward
Banned
Dude.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
It's not about a smug feeling, it's about not wanting to support these things with your money. If you are LGBT, and by buying a game, you are giving money to a homophobe who donates his money to anti-LGBT causes and lobbies, well, that's certainly a legitimate reason, wouldn't you say?
"The privilege of not giving a shit" is actually the privilege of not being a minority who is under constant attack from various powerful lobbies and political groups.
What a crybaby. Don't click on political threads if they upset you that much, maybe?
I'm afraid you have failed at that.
Here, let me try a different version:
I never had a problem with this kind of stuff when I was younger. As I've gotten older, I've learned that I can actually respect that people don't want to, directly or indirectly, give money to people that support causes that are harmful to them. I might draw the line at different places than others, but I can respect their opinion.
Not to sound condescending, but I hope some of you learn to do the same.
Replace it with a restaurant that's been exposed for discrimination, or short-waging its employees, then.
Interesting. Well, in that case, I think there's clearly a case to be made for boycotting the games, depending on the extent of the damage done. Personally, I'm not a fan of the DQ games, so I'm not going further down that rabbit hole.
Yeah, this is true actually, I'll have to correct my earlier point. I wasn't familiar enough with the history of the topic at hand and thought that "denying war crimes" sounded a bit delusional but not necessarily the making of a monster. Although I've never done it, I can imagine avoiding a product by someone such as the gamergater posted earlier.
That said, I do think it's a bit over the top to boycott a company for other fairly mundane political or personal stances. Steve Jobs being a strict boss, Phil Fish being abrasive, that kind of thing.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
If we can respect you not buying a game for you own particular reasons, is it so hard to give off your moral high horse for a minute and pay everybody else the same respect?
Lionel Richie
Member
Oh I absolutely agree with you here. This one is a good discussion in fact because I can see both sides in this argument, unless the artistic work features in any form its creator condemnable views, which in this case I'd avoid buying it as well.
He literally said he doesn't care if he gives money to someone who uses it to further harmful goals. How am I being disrespectful?