-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Is "inclusive" important to you in gaming?
- Thread starter Gamer79
- Start date
RJMacready73
Simps for Amouranth
So 30 voted yes... We have our Reeeeee infiltrators
Seriously though, nobody gives a shit unless it's blatantly shoved down our throats, I could care less who I play as as long as he/she/them/themuns/cunts fits the narrative and the setting... Big black dude in feudal Japan erm no, give me that dude rocking shit in an assassin's creed game set in Africa FFS, it ain't rocket science
Seriously though, nobody gives a shit unless it's blatantly shoved down our throats, I could care less who I play as as long as he/she/them/themuns/cunts fits the narrative and the setting... Big black dude in feudal Japan erm no, give me that dude rocking shit in an assassin's creed game set in Africa FFS, it ain't rocket science
Autistic_Pancake
Neo Member
Idk, like, the upcoming Dragon Age game? I heard it's written or directed by some transgender person, and those people usually make the idea of pushing their agenda on others a #1 priority. I watched the trailer. It seemed weird to me. It doesn't feel like the game was made for everyone to enjoy. It's as if the trailer is saying: "Either you embrace our ideas and go along with this level of [insert a non-offensive term for gay stuff], or see yourself out please." Well, I'm out.
Wimbledon
Member
Now what do you think The 20's would say?
It's just interesting we should be having a renaissance right now in gaming but It's been a couple years now where I just felt like I'm not the target audience for a lot of games today. To the point I just play indie games.....
- Bomb Rush cyber funk
- Inscryption
- Tunic
- Anger foot
- Disco Elysium
- Sable
But all these games do something right interesting world, challenges you, makes you think Outside of Sable. These are smaller games, but like i felt way more engaged in these games then i have been in these triple A games for a couple years now. Because the focus is on the wrong thing, you shouldn't have to highlight or place such importance on a checklist of how progressive a game is. Just make a complete, fun and interesting game. Which also is another issue in games these unfinished, broken, free to play, or pay to win, LIVE SERVICE GAMES that also features a lot of this progressive stuff.
It's just like they're throwing away money on things that will hurt these games they're willingly shooting themselves in the foot instead of catering to the audiences that support you and have been here since the beginning.
Gamer_By_Proxy
Member
Just do what makes sense for the story/environment etc. if there was a banging game about a gay bar with 90% gay characters I’d be all over it. Just don’t force things for box checking sake.
nnytk
Member
I guess inclusion means very different things for different people.
I see it as "a game being a relatively accurate depiction of the world it is based on."
I think inclusion gets a bad rep in this thread because of how it's confused with ideology, political correctness and extremism.
There should be nothing wrong with games being "inclusive" the way I see it. Diversity. Without extremism or identity politics. It should be the norm imho.
I see it as "a game being a relatively accurate depiction of the world it is based on."
I think inclusion gets a bad rep in this thread because of how it's confused with ideology, political correctness and extremism.
There should be nothing wrong with games being "inclusive" the way I see it. Diversity. Without extremism or identity politics. It should be the norm imho.
Last edited:
GigaBowser
The bear of bad news
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
No, but that also includes me not really caring either way.
GigaBowser
The bear of bad news
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Just talking about the game's content itself. I don't think DEI initiatives are as big of a boogie-man as many of you do but it can be problematic for sure, but if a game is good, I don't care if the game changes "male / female" to "type1 / type2." If that ruins a game for you, I don't know what to say loli care because includsive games are crud nort made by REAL developsers
DeltaPolarBear
Member
That is a dishonest statement. The Type1/Type2 is simply the outward signs that the game is crap, not the reason that it is crap. We are simply saving money by not having to purchase a game first to know when not to buy something.
Like, if someone has outward signs of having the Plague, you can't tell us we need to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are perfectly healthy. When the game told us what kind of game it is trying to be, we then know whether it is the kind of game we want to pay for.
If you look like you have the Plague, i am going to treat you like you have the plague. No need to tell me it is just fake makeup.
The thing with Virtual Signaling, is that it is a signal you can't hide. You signal to tell us about yourself, and the rest of us will react according to which group we are in. And if it just happened that the signal leads to the game not selling, that is the fault of the signal and NOT the customer.
You are never going to shame people into buying your product. Okay, that's not true, i know of women who were forced to read the Twilight series purely so they can stay in the in group of their friends. They had to buy Twilight books because they feel ashamed if they didn't do what all her friends do. Guess what; that doesn't work for gamers.
Last edited:
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
They cant do that though because if they try to make a new IP (game, movie or tv show), it'll likely super flop because nobody sane person would watch a new piece of content with tons of preachy DEI stuff jammed in your face.
But cluster those woke messages into an existing franchise and people will watch it or play that game. But given recent events, it seems people are smart enough to sniff it out a mile away so they'll just avoid it.
Terrible decisions on companies with their political employees. Congratulations! You just bombed a golden goose franchise! In life, it's actually pretty hard to screw things up when you got success. All I know is when it comes to consumer goods, once you got a good thing going that can sell for 10 or 20 years(!), all you do is keep up the quality, tweak it a bit, refresh the packaging every 5 years, make some offshoot line extension items, and simply coast on a successful brand. It's hard to get a super brand selling millions or billions. But once you do, you dont mess with the formula of success. You only got to worry about equally big competitors squeezing in, which may require a bigger overhaul. Or there's a societal change (ie. lets say customers dont want aspartame in their food, so food makers adjust). But often times all big companies kind of do their own thing and not rock the boat of stupidity.
In gaming. It's not even competitors that can sink their products most of the time. It's their own employees fucking it up themselves! LOL
Last edited:
Rocky_Balboa
Member
If the game doesn't have a character with vitiligo in it, I won't play it! 
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
It’s not important to me, but I’m also not going to clutch my pearls and wail because they made a woman or black person the lead character.
My only issue is when we characters that appear to be there just to check boxes. Especially when they don’t make any sense.
My only issue is when we characters that appear to be there just to check boxes. Especially when they don’t make any sense.
Gambit2483
Member
This "need" for Inclusion and representation mostly comes from women. There have been numerous studies on this issue where Guys tend to project the Hero onto themselves and see themselves in that regard whereas girls need to project themselves onto the hero and why they constantly shout that they "need to see themselves" in videogames and are constantly self-inserting in media.
It's why (typically) guys prefer playing as established heros yet girls prefer customizing their own in-game characters, which goes back to boys prefering action figures vs girls playing with dress up dolls.
It's why (typically) guys prefer playing as established heros yet girls prefer customizing their own in-game characters, which goes back to boys prefering action figures vs girls playing with dress up dolls.
Last edited:
If you implant a quota system you are not hiring the best people for you, at best you will get the best people in that quota. If you are not using a meritocratic system you will get mediocre people soon when this practice is extended to your competitors
Gandih42
Member
You're right, Gamers just buy your product based on misleading advertisement and hype. Gamers would never buy obviously broken and unfinished games en masse because of inflated hype and wanting to in on the new hotness. You cannot fool Gamers.
(on a more serious note, I do feel like recent years of bad launches has finally instilled some sense of sanity and caution in the wider gaming audience. I sincerely hope this post will age poorly).
Lord Panda
The Sea is Always Right
Last edited:
Assuming if you were the person implementing a quota system, you still have to screen people based on standards. A quotas system is just guaranteed placement for a selected few.
Now what do you think The 20's would say?
Added the next panel for the social media era.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Not because they're high quality. More because they're just plain ol fun.
sainraja
Member
I am not going to get in a "war" with you over this. I see it as pointless. If a creator is organically creating something new that keeps inclusivity in mind, that's great and I don't think you will see many complaining about those games but of course, given today's climate, with the whole culture war going on, almost anything can become a target (deserving or not) but that will die down.
Last edited:
Mephisto40
Member
Making things "Inclusive" often has the complete opposite effect, as it doesn't include the people that don't care about something being inclusive
An example of this is a man identifies as male, he's no longer able to select the male option from the gender select in games, it's now "body type". If I want to select male I can't, because somebody else has decided that male shouldnt be an option, therefore it's no longer "inclusive" of what I would like to pick
An example of this is a man identifies as male, he's no longer able to select the male option from the gender select in games, it's now "body type". If I want to select male I can't, because somebody else has decided that male shouldnt be an option, therefore it's no longer "inclusive" of what I would like to pick
ResilientBanana
Member
It's one thing to be inclusive, it's another for it to be jammed down my throat. I play video games to escape reality, not join another political twitter-like platform. Video games should be a place where we don't have to worry about judgement, but ironically forcing inclusion and creating dialog around it, pretty much forces people to cast judgement and polarizes people. Inclusion should be organic, not important to the story. If the LGBTQ+ community could be more like Neil Patrick Harris, they would be far easier to tolerate. Sure we know NPH is gay, but also he doesn't flaunt it and is very classy about it. Kind of like how I don't run around telling people I'm a straight white guy and trying to force that ideology on the LGBTQ+ community.
Secondly, intentionally making women chunky, ugly, and ready to eat a bag of chips, is an interesting move. Like sure, you're now not only ugly in real life, but now you can also be ugly in-game. Yet, male character keep staying muscular, handsome, and look like true warriors. If you're out in the battlefield, and you're constantly fighting, you should be fit, strong and ready to roll. There's no chance you're not going to be lean as fuck when you're constantly burning calories.
Secondly, intentionally making women chunky, ugly, and ready to eat a bag of chips, is an interesting move. Like sure, you're now not only ugly in real life, but now you can also be ugly in-game. Yet, male character keep staying muscular, handsome, and look like true warriors. If you're out in the battlefield, and you're constantly fighting, you should be fit, strong and ready to roll. There's no chance you're not going to be lean as fuck when you're constantly burning calories.
Last edited:
BloodborneHat3r
Neo Member
Why would I care if there are more black and alphabet people than white people on a game? I am neither of those nor do I care!
KimDongHwan
Member
Isn't it weird that LGBT characters need to express that they are, like we (player) need to know their sexual orientation, but do we even know for any other character in the past anything about that? like what does Sonic like? is Mario bi? yes? no? no one cared
Wolves hunt in packs
Gold Member
What is inclusion? Me no english...
Is it casting Lance Reddick(RIP, love him) as Wesker? Even tho in all games he's white? yes? or something else?
Is it casting Lance Reddick(RIP, love him) as Wesker? Even tho in all games he's white? yes? or something else?
That's the thing, sexual orientation is invisible 99% of the time unless its broadcast through coded language/costuming. So you see that shaved side of head haircut, the colored hair, the potato sack body shape, that cocked hip stance, all stuff that's basically the new "earring in the right ear only" or colored bandana in the back pocket. And if actual appeal to LGBT was all that mattered, this coded design would suffice.
But in the world of virtue signaling that's geared towards corporations and "the masses" that actually are not part of that community, it has to be overt. You don't "get credit" for LGBT+++ if it isn't made explicit because otherwise it won't count. It's led to a thousand seemingly random lines in shows where one character has to make a big verbal announcement of their same sex partner or trans identity or whatever because that's the only way to inject that stuff into a hard bitten cop show, tense teen drama, or whatever.
DeaDPo0L84
Member
This question is loaded cause brain damaged lunatics have changed definitions of certain things to make it a gotcha question. If you are asked this and you say no it is automatically assumed by many that you want all the gays to be genocided alongside anyone that isn't white.
Bernardougf
Member
"Inclusivity is very very important.. everyone should have a chance to see thenselfs represented in games, thats why we made this game with a woman lead, so girls everywhere can feel represented and this is a special and key point for us"
90% of the market (man) dont buy your game ... game fails miserable
"Why all the bigots and misogynistic incels didnt buy our game ? Why they care if they are playing as a woman? Who you play as is not important! Thats just absurd"
Modern Inclusive logic of the woke retarded devs and its even more retarded defenders for you.
90% of the market (man) dont buy your game ... game fails miserable
"Why all the bigots and misogynistic incels didnt buy our game ? Why they care if they are playing as a woman? Who you play as is not important! Thats just absurd"
Modern Inclusive logic of the woke retarded devs and its even more retarded defenders for you.
DannyDanger
Member
It didn't matter to me before. And tbh as a black dude I liked black characters in games. The problem is, is it just used to be a character, no big deal. Now the companies have to virtue signal and make that the main selling point. To the point I assume any POC character is part of an agenda.
Then Everytime I try to give the character the BOTD, like I did with Ghosts of Yotei, you see what the voice is like on Twitter, and then its back to "fuck this shit"
Then Everytime I try to give the character the BOTD, like I did with Ghosts of Yotei, you see what the voice is like on Twitter, and then its back to "fuck this shit"
A female lead is NOT the issue, so long as she promises to NOT preach at the male audience.
And she doesn't even need to be a sexpot like Stellar Blade, Bayonetta, or versions of Lara Croft.
Just a normal, athletic (since 99% of ALL games involve running, jumping, combat, etc) woman with appealing appearance instead of a clown world aesthetic. Look at Alien: Isolation or Control for example, non sexualized women who are still enjoyable to play. Versus WTF was in Concord, Dustborn, or games of that ilk.
Same for ethnicities. Shed the agenda driven virtue signaling and it's all good.
cash_longfellow
Member
Bro, they literally just came out with that Zelda game where you play as Zelda because certain people wouldn’t stop complaining about not being able to play as her. Perfect example of forced inclusion.
Last edited:
Negotiator
Member
I'm not sure if BlackRock has a significant amount of Nintendo shares, but Nintendo games aren't narrative-heavy (like Sony/Microsoft ones).
That's why Nintendo can get a free pass, even if it's a forced ESG/DEI inclusion.
Muffdraul
Member
Not important to me. What is important to me is that developers make their games as they want them to be, as they envision them. If a developer wants their game to be "more inclusive" and have representation of every race and gender imaginable, then they should do that. I'll try that game, and if it's good, I'll enjoy it.
What I don't want is forced inclusion. I remember when GTA5 had its big unveiling, the usual suspects (who are probably all now at purple forum) were loudly complaining that the three protagonists were all male. "Why couldn't they have at least one of them be a female?!" Because that simply wasn't part of their idea for this game. I'd wager it probably never even occurred to R* to make one of them female. If it did, obviously they decided against it and that's that. It's their creation and I respect that.
By the same token, if a developer chooses to hire someone like Sweet Baby Inc, that's a choice for them to make and you won't see me losing my shit over it. Like it or not, we now live in a world where many feel the need to consider that stuff. Good luck putting that genie back in the bottle. I've played several Sweet Baby tainted games that I thought were great.
Fun fact: Neil Druckmann was already listening to Anita Sarkeesian's preaching when he was still making TLOU1. One of my all time favorite games, and I like TLOU2 even more.
What I don't want is forced inclusion. I remember when GTA5 had its big unveiling, the usual suspects (who are probably all now at purple forum) were loudly complaining that the three protagonists were all male. "Why couldn't they have at least one of them be a female?!" Because that simply wasn't part of their idea for this game. I'd wager it probably never even occurred to R* to make one of them female. If it did, obviously they decided against it and that's that. It's their creation and I respect that.
By the same token, if a developer chooses to hire someone like Sweet Baby Inc, that's a choice for them to make and you won't see me losing my shit over it. Like it or not, we now live in a world where many feel the need to consider that stuff. Good luck putting that genie back in the bottle. I've played several Sweet Baby tainted games that I thought were great.
Fun fact: Neil Druckmann was already listening to Anita Sarkeesian's preaching when he was still making TLOU1. One of my all time favorite games, and I like TLOU2 even more.
Lucifers Beard
Member
No, it's not important to me. Gameplay always has to be the absolute top priority as that is the most important element of a video game. That's not up for debate.
That being said, if a games narrative is about people and their beliefs, preferences or any other protected characteristic then that's OK too. I imagine I'll almost never be the target audience for that type of game, but that's cool and I understand that people are different and like different things.
What isn't OK to me is when developers shoehorn these elements into games when it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the game or it's narrative and is done for the sake of diversity tick boxing. It comes across as massively disingenuous and makes me fucking cringe when developers shout from the rooftops about it.
That being said, if a games narrative is about people and their beliefs, preferences or any other protected characteristic then that's OK too. I imagine I'll almost never be the target audience for that type of game, but that's cool and I understand that people are different and like different things.
What isn't OK to me is when developers shoehorn these elements into games when it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the game or it's narrative and is done for the sake of diversity tick boxing. It comes across as massively disingenuous and makes me fucking cringe when developers shout from the rooftops about it.
DirtInUrEye
Neo Member
I agree with the premise of the OP and your post, but I diverge in regard to the Abby character in TLOU2. I thought she was a very compelling character, especially by video game standards, and I felt immersed in her storyline. In fact I sided with her by the end of the journey.
Sidenote: I find the sequel game overrated in other ways.
But yeah, I do not give a hoot about inclusivity in games. Good writing though? Sure. It's pretty rare in this medium.
DragoonKain
Neighbours from Hell
Couldn't care less. I think the only people who care look at it as a form of validation, and if you need validation, you have insecurity issues that are a whole other issue entirely.
Zacfoldor
Member
Disagree. I'm 100% against forced messaging/inclusion and even I thought it would be tight to get a Zelda game where you play as Zelda. It isn't forced inclusion and they didn't invent female link, Zelda is a long standing character and I'm glad she got her own game. To me inclusion isn't important, but having cool characters is and Zelda is a cool cat. Link will be back next game, he needed a break. Might as well say Elden Ring is woke because it has type a type b body.
Why Nintendo created that game shall forever remain a mystery, but I doubt, "people wouldn’t stop complaining" affects Nintendo, otherwise they would have implemented many more of my ideas long ago.
Don't put that evil on Nintendo.
Last edited:
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
As a black 50 yr old man, as I said before, I love that there is more representation on screen for black people in general, not just black men. My female friends and female cousins play games. They consume much of the same content (or kinds of content) that I do. I loved DS9 for being more diverse than other shows in that universe. Seeing Ben Sisko and be the LEAD and Captain was LOVELY, IMO.
Growing up, there weren't many positive black roles on TV and in movies, let alone lead roles where they were actually the leads. Even if they were positive, they weren't important to the story or they fit the magical negro trope. It wasn't until The Cosby Show that we had something where the characters weren't living in poverty or in "the hood" ... A Different World, a spin off show, was a landmark in showing young black adults in college at an HBCU (a fictional one) ... Even one who was an older adult returning to college.
I also know I'm not alone in that feeling.
As far as gaming goes, inclusivity is important too. Until about 2010, very few, if any, games had black leads. That number has grown but it's still small. And that's ok. Like some have said in another thread, we need more games that aren't centered around medieval Europe... Black Sun: Wukong is a great example, even though it isn't from the US. And is probably one of the only ones like it released IN the US with the sales numbers it has.
As far as LGBTQ representation, I'm all for it. None of it bothers me. Latinos, Muslims (that aren't depicted as terrorists for the 18,846,639th time), Jews, Sikhs, Filipinos, Thai, etc ... Bring them all in! (Japanese, Chinese and Koreans are well represented already in many videogames)
I still don't know what the issue was with Sweet Baby that everyone was talking about since I never really read the OP on it... I'll look it up later.
Growing up, there weren't many positive black roles on TV and in movies, let alone lead roles where they were actually the leads. Even if they were positive, they weren't important to the story or they fit the magical negro trope. It wasn't until The Cosby Show that we had something where the characters weren't living in poverty or in "the hood" ... A Different World, a spin off show, was a landmark in showing young black adults in college at an HBCU (a fictional one) ... Even one who was an older adult returning to college.
I also know I'm not alone in that feeling.
As far as gaming goes, inclusivity is important too. Until about 2010, very few, if any, games had black leads. That number has grown but it's still small. And that's ok. Like some have said in another thread, we need more games that aren't centered around medieval Europe... Black Sun: Wukong is a great example, even though it isn't from the US. And is probably one of the only ones like it released IN the US with the sales numbers it has.
As far as LGBTQ representation, I'm all for it. None of it bothers me. Latinos, Muslims (that aren't depicted as terrorists for the 18,846,639th time), Jews, Sikhs, Filipinos, Thai, etc ... Bring them all in! (Japanese, Chinese and Koreans are well represented already in many videogames)
I still don't know what the issue was with Sweet Baby that everyone was talking about since I never really read the OP on it... I'll look it up later.
cash_longfellow
Member
I’m not putting evil on anyone…it’s a discussion about inclusion and the poster I replied to acted like Nintendo never did it in…and I quote, “ANY” game.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
YeulEmeralda
Linux User
Ofcourse through penis Unity. Release the waifus
Similar threads
- Poll