So what you are talking about first, that stuff is not what people are getting outraged about. I've been pissed off about that for 20 years but most people don't care. People are outraged about drug overdose Floyd dying, Wendy's guy who died while trying to fight his way out of a DUI arrest, and now Mr. "I'm just gonna grab something from my car real quick before you arrest me". That is what sparks the outrage, they are using intentional grey area incidents to further polarize the BLM people against people who support having police, this is an attack on our country and culture, and it's not entirely organic.
Also, there's something like 700,000 police interactions in the US per day (from 2015) so to act like it's all cops is wrong. The media that has been blatantly dishonest against Trump now has a riot button by choose what they want to focus on and show people, and they're using it.
If you think these singular incidents were catalysts for outrage, then you are sorely mistaken. Distrust and outright hatred for police is decades, if not centuries old. That a single incident finally resulted in protest just means that it was the straw that broke the camel's back. And I will not that's not the situation at all. Trayvon Martin was years ago. There's probably a new protest every month, and you can't write them all off as criminals, which is the same kind of excuse-making that has allowed the issue to be ignored for so long.
I gave you my personal experience, as a black man. Ten_Fold gave you his perspective as what I assume is a black man's perspective. If you want to quote me numbers and sample size, do yourself a favor and go out and speak to some black people. Just walk along the street and ask them honestly what their interactions with the police have been like. You can't pass this off as an exaggeration when, I say again, entire communities come away with similar opinions. Why are our experiences with police so disproportionately negative compared to someone like you? Try getting to the bottom of that riddle, without falling back on statistics that are largely irrelevant to the situation at hand.
I always like to provide a more relatable analogy in these instances, as I can understand it's hard for some to empathize with the minority experience in the US. I have 2 sisters. I have many female friends as well. Many women will say a blanket statement like, "men are creeps," and some men will clutch their satchels in disgust at the stereotype. These woman must not know what they're talking about? They're radical, or they're "feminazis." You can look at specific cases of rape where the woman was drunk and acting flirtatious. She was wearing revealing clothing. She went to the man's room and initiated contact. You can try to site specific cases in an attempt to diminish the claim that men are creeps, because it makes you feel bad to think that you'd be viewed as a creep. The truth is, I'm not a creep, but I've had some really awkward interactions with women when I was younger. And listening to stories from my sisters and female friends, I realize that even my awkward engagements can be viewed as creepy, when composited with what is a large number of incredibly gross and bizarre encounters that they have experienced in their lives. Sure, there are more normal interactions with men than gross ones, but they experience a disproportionately larger number of gross encounters with the opposite sex than men do. I never tried to discount or downplay their experiences, or try to cite some statistical anomalies to pretend that what they experienced wasn't real. I had empathy, and I know from my own awkward experiences how there's not a lot further a situation has to progress before it falls into the realm of creepy.
I find it more valuable to understand why the offended took offense, than to try convincing them that they shouldn't take offense. I can improve myself, and hopefully the rest of the community by looking inward to figure out how to not make someone else feel uncomfortable. Soul-searching never hurt anything but some personal pride. But you come out stronger on the other side.
So, to keep this lengthy response on topic, that is why measures like removing sirens might seem small to some, but might make a difference to others. A progressive workforce would do the cost-benefit analysis on this decision and say to themselves that no one will give a rip if you remove the sirens. It's not an integral part of the game. On the other hand, it might give the people who are truly affected by this sort of thing (as small a population as that might be) a better opinion of the company. It might also get some play in the media, and publicity is good. It's a net positive, so the decision is made. Marginal gains are worthwhile if they require minimal effort, like this. The people acting offended by this decision are just that, acting. Short attention spans will have them fawning over graphics or new gameplay features, as this issue isn't genuinely important to them. There's relatively little downside, save for the handful of truly principled gamers who will boycott the game, because this was a weird moral stance for them. But those gamers probably weren't as committed to the franchise anyway, so could have easily walked for other reasons.
We perform cost-benefit analysis like this all the time, when it comes time to remove features from our products. You can't please everyone, and there will always be that sub-group of users who will bitch and moan about everything. You can probably do without those users in many cases, because they're the ones that will shit up your name on social media, even when you do good by them. So it probably wasn't a tough call to make.
