As to the bolded point, I think you're wrong. There are folks that argue that developers need to take responsibility and take a leadership position when it comes to portrayal and characterization.
Straw man aside, we may have a differing understanding of what 'Moral Authority' actually means. Asking for better representation in some games does not put the developer in such a position.
It's a business and a form of fictional art. Developers are free to create their vision as they see fit, while at the same time making decisions that they feel will help to sell their games best.
I'd argue that it is the latter that is all that's important these days. Since their demographics are widening, it would make good business sense to offer better representation, surely?
While it's not a niche market anymore, I think that those who weigh in on these issues are the outspoken minority.
The issues are usually about minority representation so that's a given.
I think it's silly to find anything truly problematic with a video game, unless we're talking gameplay here.
What's the difference between problematic and
truly problematic? Where do games like 'Ethnic Cleansing' or 'Cluster's Revenge' fall...?
Like I said in my response to Shy, I preferred gaming during the 5th generation when there weren't so many people crying foul about various thing (just so we're clear, I'm not using the phrase "crying foul" to imply that anyone is literally crying).
As much as people don't have to play or support games they take offense at, you don't have to listen to the complaints.
I also think that the overall quantity of quality games has taken a hit due in large part to focus on story and cinematically over gameplay.
Is it ironic that you are complaining about the focus on story and cinematics in an MGS thread, arguably the game that kickstarted that trend (in b4 "MGS focuses on the gameplay as well")?
I disagree though. Frankly, that's a hugely insular, simplistic and borderline solipsistic view of the industry that boils down to: "I don't like cinematic/story focused games, so the quality of gaming has gone down".
If there were a dip in quality in gaming overall, it would be due to a number of factors, including:
a) Nostalgia/Selective memory - everything was better back when you were a kid.
b) The increased number of games released - statistically, more games means more shit.
c) Increased budgets - having to recoup costs means developers have to make compromises particularly when creating mechanics.
d) Shorter development cycles - To fit into marketing and business strategy, games need to hit certain quarters and dates to maximise sales (see point C), even at the expense of quality.
It's what a lot of people wanted for the future, though. Now that the future is now the present, the issue is representation and characterization. Call me a cranky old man, but I long for the days when these were non issues
But they are issues for some people. Why is that so hard to accept? You don't have to agree with them, just empathise a little.
I never said that anyone was asking me to be. I was simply explaining my position.
It was a figure of speech. You don't need to be bothered about portrayals in videogames, you just need to accept that other people are, and that it's okay for them to be.
Here's what I don't get. The GTA games have made me feel uncomfortable ever since GTA3. So I don't buy them. I also don't complain about them either. So why, if you feel continually abused by a franchise, would you continue to support it?
Can't you see the logical minefield you're walking? Why don't you ignore the complaints that annoy you, as you advise complainers to ignore the games that offend them...?
this was an earlier version of the process. here's the latest iteration:
