You must log in or register to comment.
A game is only called “woke” when it’s bad. Balder’s Gate 3 is one of the most “woke” major releases in the last few years but you hardly hear them complain about it.
It’s the same thing with cyberpunk 2077. The anti-woke crowd can’t agree on whether it’s woke because many of them like it.
I think the problem isn’t the wokeness for most people, but the awkward shoehorning of stereotypes and forced messaging that makes everything feel cheap and doesn’t contribute to the experience or story. For example having a lgbtq+ element for the sake of checking a diversity box, instead of it being a random fact of this world or character.
How do you differentiate between a character “written for the sake of checking a diversity box”, a poorly-written diverse character, and a “random fact of the world”? It’s a fictional world. Nothing is random. It’s all creative decisions made by a team of writers and producers.
I don’t think shoehorning in of diverse identities and character backgrounds is good representation or good art, and I completely agree with your point there.
But I don’t think that the people driving the current backlash bother to make those distinctions.
What I see is a lot of outrage being stoked by people using the (updated) language and tactics of gamergate, and I don’t think the result of that will be “better representation”.
I think the result will be devs being harrassed and pushed out of an already brutal industry.
An LGBTQ person doesn’t need “a good reason” for being written that way. If they did, then so would the straight person, no? Unless, of course, we’re trying to say that every story’s default needs to be a straight white man who doesn’t need to be constantly justifying his existence.
Frankly, these days you better have a damn good reason why we have to deal with the ten-thousandth same old shoe-horned straight relationship that only exists because two main characters happen to be opposite genders and roughly the same age. Like, yeah, who could have seen that coming wow good job here’s a sticker.
It’s not about checking a diversity box, it’s about the barest amount of representation. The LGBT people in my life don’t exist because they fit some kind of plot-point in my life; they exist because that’s just how the dice landed and they don’t owe me a justification for why they are that way in order to be my friends. That would be absurd, right?
—
Sidenote: Everyone complaining about Veilguard(for example) forgets that a) Bioware is famously unclear about what dialogue choices do and b) they just don’t, historically, seem to have the capacity to write terribly creative games. They’re fine and I’ve enjoyed playing the ones I have but still.
I didn’t say they need a reason to exist. I said basically the same thing as you. A character is supposed to just exists with their traits and act naturally, instead of making diversity their whole personality. It’s the same thing as the classic token black guy in movies. Only present to serve the quota, not actually contributing to anything. And having a character make their straight-ness and whiteness their whole personality would be just as infuriating.
I dispise forced romance just as much as you seem to, it doesn’t matter to me what the genders involved are, if it’s there I want it to make sense and add something, not just tick a box.
Right, except that 99% of LGBT characters aren’t doing anything special and their mere existence, since we aren’t numb to it, is taken as some political act of tokenism. It’s as simple as being aware that you’re going to have biases and letting yourself get used to it instead of complaining about it.
And yes, some of it will be a bit heavy-handed and some will even be an attempt to get more money but like, so what? It’s not nearly as much as everyone claims and it all serves to normalize it so get over it. It’s not like there isn’t heaps of absolutely dogshit straight writing that we are fine ignoring for the sake of the rest of the game. Tthe second it’s the same thing but with a gay character every shitstain gets all bent outta shape over it like their problem isn’t their own homophobia.
Woke activists have already said that they are willing to annihilate and scorched-earth and salt-the-fields if DEI ESG woke things arent put front and centre into video games.
So maybe we dont need people who actively hate video games and gamers to be in the video game making industry. The woke can go be part of Hollywood leave the gamers alone.
Woke activists have already said that they are willing to annihilate and scorched-earth and salt-the-fields if DEI ESG woke things arent put front and centre into video games.
What exactly is your problem with ESG, which measures the social and environmental impact of a companies actions? You think we… shouldn’t hold corpos responsible for their actions?
Elon Musk doesn’t want DEI, do you think maybe there might be a good reason the US has it?
So maybe we dont need people who actively hate video games and gamers to be in the video game making industry. The woke can go be part of Hollywood leave the gamers alone.
I’m going to need you to explain how wanting representation of non cishetero characters is proof of ‘people who actively hate video games and gamers…’
You want to know who hate video games and gamers? ‘Anti-woke’ gamers. All this whining and crying over having a character be bi, or someone being (gasp) non-binary is performative and ridiculous. If your entire day and gaming experience can be ruined by someone making a non-binary character in a fucking single player RPG, that’s laughable, and the taunting you’ll receive is justified.
I bought BG3 due to constant negative comments about it. It’s woke, everyone is bi (sign me the fuck up), random misogyny, etc. I figured if they were that mad it had to be good, and 427 hours of gameplay later I am glad I did that.
There were absolutely people calling that game woke. You didn’t hear them because they were drowned out by the good press. It’s not that game is only called woke when it’s bad, it’s that when a game is good there’s enough positive publicity to drowned out the negative.
BG3 doesn’t lecture you like other games though. There is a difference between having these people live in your world vs being the spokesperson for BLM.
The difference isn’t in subject matter, but writing quality. I like retro shooters and considering Build Engine(think Duke Nukem) style games are based on movie genres, I’d love a blaxploitation game were I’m shooting Nazis and throwing molotov cocktails at clansmen. The subject matter would absolutely be in you face.
Remember, people got offended at how Nazis were portrayed Wolfenstein, a game solely about killing Nazis.
We can critique the writing of games like Dustborn, but the moment you start complaining about “wokeness”, you signal that you’re just gaming the algorithm for the lowest common denominator of viewer to drive that ad money up.
Which games are like that, though?
I heard complaints about BG3 characters being romanceable independently of MC’s gender and race, that it’s against lore and statistics. But my guess would be that it would’ve been the thing devs wanted to do not because of wokeness, but because it seems fairer towards the player.
Is that dude waiting for an American Black Woman to invent punctuation marks?
Woke isn’t being progressive. It’s being progressive to an extent beyond any sort of logic, virtue signaling constantly, and then calling anyone who disagrees with you morally or intellectually inferior.
In entertainment, that often results in some really annoying elements that I think we can all acknowledge are a thing after almost a decade of this:
- There is a minority protagonist. Said protagonist is disproportionately a straight coded conventionally attractive white women in their 20s.
- The only flaw the protagonist will have is not being confident enough
- There is then a minority side character. Said character will disproportionately be a black woman obviously less attractive than the protagonist, or a upper middle class gay fuckboi.
- If there is not one of these two things, a minority side character will be shoehorned in somewhere. The character will feel visibly out of place, and no explanation will be given. For example, they’ll do some random black character in a fantasy setting that’s clearly based off Scotland in the 1200s.
- Important character goes on a monologue that feels like a political PSA
- The IP’s understanding of progressive politics and social justice is roughly equivalent to Tumblr circa 2013.
- Absolutely terrible writing. Even if you swapped all the “woke” elements for generic entertainment elements, the IP would still be terrible.
- Likewise, the IP itself is often put together in an extremely lazy and mediocre way. If said “woke” content was not there, it would be universally panned for its low quality.
- Amazing reviews. All aspects of the IP get 10/10 from the “professional” critics. All the reviews are similar enough that the critics either collaborated or read off the press release.
- The critics care more about the social justice aspect than the game itself.
- You get the sense both the creators and the critics of the IP not only don’t consume this type of IP in their spare time, but actively resent people who do.
- Constant fucking gaslighting. Anyone who doesn’t like this ultimately mediocre IP is either morally and intellectually inferior. This usually comes in the form of accusations of being a bigot, a Nazi, or a Trump supporter.
- Bigots, Nazis, and Trump supporters will then try to recruit people who are pissed about the gaslighting.
- At some point the IP itself fades into the background, and it just becomes yet another culture war battleground.
I think there’s a reason Star Wars gets more shit for being woke than Spiderverse, or that Arcane hasn’t become a culture war battleground in the same way She-Hulk did. The reason being those shows are actually good, and most people are happy to watch good shows.
Woke isn’t being progressive. It’s being progressive to an extent beyond any sort of logic, virtue signaling constantly, and then calling anyone who disagrees with you morally or intellectually inferior
I fucking hate that the idea of being woke was poisoned and turned into this when it very much is not and never was.
Woke is acknowledging the systemic racism playing out daily in the United States of America.
I think most of what you wrote isn’t even true to be honest, it’s a well strung together list of annoying tropes which doesn’t even happen nearly as much or widely as some would suggest. It’s a neat little “here’s a bad way of caring” package but it ain’t the truth.
I appreciate the effort you went through to write the post and I understand your viewpoint. At the same time, this is a great example of how the term “woke” has been co-opted into meaning something it never really did. Being awake to the injustices present in our lives isn’t a bad thing. Turning woke into a slur to wrongly characterize and misdirect away from its true original intent has been an effective, and gross, way to get people to automatically reject real critique.
You’re both right, but it’s far too late to take the word back, no point in going on about the origins.
No it isn’t.
I am woke, and that is a good thing, and anyone complaining about that is an idiot.
I’d be described as woke, but I’ve always hated the term. Maybe it’s because I was just growing into it right as it became the bogeyman phrase, I don’t know.
Woke is acknowledging the systemic racism playing out daily in the United States of America.
If only. But like all of your societal problems, it’s being exported to all kinds of places, often where it has little relevance, but where it can be used for political gain by soulless individuals.
Your last bit is the only part that matters. Good content is good. There’s so much well written progressive “woke” stuff that does well, but it’s easy to point at a shitty flop and say it failed because it’s “woke” rather than doing the hard work and actually analyzing why it’s bad. “Woke” content isn’t an issue in media. It’s that we’re getting so much bad and lazy writing in AAA games (and other big media). They aren’t allowed to be creative, so it ends up being garbage.
Add on top of that that the games industry has laid off TENS OF THOUSANDS of devs in the last three or four years.
I know a lot of talented people who are no longer working as devs, or who have been job searching for months.
Of course this doesn’t mean that the studios still producing games have narrowed their scopes, they just dump more work on the survivors.
And “woke DEI SJW snowflake game dev” is far from the only thing making games worse, it’s just what a lot of gamers can easily identify as a problem.
By the time I left, my last industry job had been reduced to what felt like manning the slop hose of mtx store items made by overseas outsource studios producing soulless trash under fuck-knows-what kind of nightmare working conditions.
We started seeing more diversity in games because devs are diverse and wanted to see themselves and their friends in their art.
The problem has never been queer or black characters in games. It is, and always has been, the prioritizing of profit over quality craft.
I’d argue that forced diversity is primarily because so many higher ups don’t give a fuck about gaming or making good content.
The suits just want money, and for some reason corporate thought that weighing in on social and political issues was a huge money maker in the 2020s. The journalists just want to promote their own political agenda and get ragebait clicks. The project director is someone with a corporate background but a progressive flair that makes them seem “hip” to the suits.
Meanwhile the people who give a shit, regardless of their identity, don’t have a voice in the room.
I’m sure there are plenty of minorities that are super pissed about what happened to bioware, but the only way you’d hear from them is by looking at sales figures because they don’t have a bully pulpit.
What happened to BioWare, in your estimation?
Who’s this project director with a corporate background? Are you referring to an actual person, or is this how you assume the industry works?
Of course there are minorities who don’t like Veilguard. No group is monolithic. I found two quite different critiques of the trans representation in Veilguard by trans creators, but yeah I’ll admit I had to do some digging, not because I had to sift through so many agenda-pushing journalist reviews, but because youtube is absolutely FLOODED with anti-woke reactionaries pushing - guess what? ragebait content featuring thumbnails of the Qunari companion.
Complaining about forced diversity and wokeness isn’t critique. When it comes down to it, these are buzzwords that wind up meaning different things to different people. This bandwagon-jumping VEILGUARD BAD, BIOWARE DOOMED shit adds nothing of value to games discourse. People who claim to care about games need to stop engaging with it and seek out or create constructive critiques instead, because it only damages the most human parts of the industry, not some corporate bottom line.
As for sales figures, it seems like it’s doing just fine tbh, but I think you’re wrong to assume that you could really find any sort of critical opinion by sifting through that data.
And just for the record, re: my first two paragraphs:
Over the course of development, the franchise lead writer, the EP (and actually maybe a second EP?), the creative director, and the art director all changed. This is extremely unusual not only for BioWare, but any game.
That said, the people who replaced them were not, from what I can tell, people with corporate backgrounds. They all appear to be industry veterans, many of them internal promotions and longtime BioWare employees. Go check the mobygames credits if you want to see for yourself.
Additionally, BioWare laid off “approximately” 50 people, many from the Edmonton studio, in August of 2023 partway through development of Veilguard.
Dragon Age 4 was not developed in a stable, secure environment. From what I’ve read, significant changes were made between the game’s inception as Dreadwolf, and its release as Veilguard.
That the focus is now almost exclusively on the game’s minority representation speaks volumes about what these supposed “people who care about games” actually value.
I wound up spending a significant amount of time today looking into the development history of Veilguard, and what actually got released, and what people have liked and disliked about it.
And you know what? I don’t think it’s an example of forced diversity at all.
I think a team trying to make a game under immense external pressures made something imperfect, but earnest and deeply personal to some of the team. And it isn’t for everyone, and that’s fine, actually.
I get what you’re saying, but…
For example, they’ll do some random black character in a fantasy setting that’s clearly based off Scotland in the 1200s.
While I don’t know about 1200s Scotland specifically, the notion that black people didn’t exist in old Europe is a false narrative by racists who seem to believe immigration was invented around the 1700s (like, I’ve seen them claim black people don’t fit into Ancient Greece, which is definitely wrong.)
I mean immigration existed, but it wasn’t nearly as common as today. A lot of these IPs just plop a minority in an area where their presence would turn heads, have everyone act super casual about it because they are too lazy for a backstory, and then call everyone a bigot who points out this is sort of silly. On the flip side, there are people who will call creators bigots for not including minorities in some quasi historical setting, even if their presence was rare.
Like pretend someone was making a movie in present day central Africa. Everyone is central African. Except one dude who is pure blooded Navajo. No explanation is ever given, and the only people who seem to even notice his race is the villain.
While it’s perfectly possible for someone of Navajo descent to find themselves in central Africa, it’s not really that likely. Audiences would want an explanation, and would consider it unrealistic if absolutely nobody commented on it except some over the top villain.
There’s also an aspect of gaslighting going on here. Over the past decade historians have made a lot of claims about racial compositions of historical groups that were later exposed to be largely inaccurate. While historical inaccuracies are always a thing, it’s pretty convenient that all these inaccurate claims fit into the narrative pushed by American progressive identity politics.
While it’s perfectly possible for someone of Navajo descent to find themselves in central Africa, it’s not really that likely.
What part about literally any story about heroes and adventures is “really that likely”? Every story ever told is told because they’re unique and thrilling and unusual. Pretending like your problem with the “wrong” races mixing in fiction is because it’s “unlikely” belies the fact that everything in these stories is unlikely. Why aren’t you complaining about main characters that are shockingly born from the lost line of monarchs, the last heir able to save the kingdom? Or having a mysterious, ancient weapon literally fall into their hands? Or any other number of preposterously unlikely things that are what make these stories worth telling? You don’t complain about them because they don’t bother you. But a black person in Scotland? THAT’S where you draw the line? Come the fuck on.
Why do I even bother, honestly.
Great comment, you’ve nailed it.
I think there’s a reason Star Wars gets more shit for being woke than Spiderverse
Funny enough even within the Star Wars universe there are good and bad things. Mandalorian and Rogue One? Pretty great. Episode 7+ and Acolyte? Pretty shit. You’ll notice though that the more forced the progressivism is in a given piece of content, the more it sucks. In other words: bad writing doesn’t just fuck the story up, it bakes in messaging that doesn’t even make sense contextually.
Anyone who has ever read the Sword of Truth series and encountered the author’s obsession with hating socialism has seen what happens when right-wing folk do it: it ruins the experience. Why would we excuse it from progressives?
I disagree with your premise that that “forced progressivism” messes things up. Andor, for example, is the most progressive Star Wars media ever, and it’s amazing for it. (It’s literally about a leftist, or at least leftist coded, rebellion against Fascists, and wears it proudly.) The reason is because the people making it were allowed to be creative and were passionate about what they were making.
Its the lack of creative freedom and passion that kills things. Most things with a lot of money put into them are directed by suits, not creatives. They don’t want to take risks, so they just follow trends and formulas. This leads to the media not having anything to actually say, and just a veneer of trying to appeal to certain people, without actually doing anything with it.
I haven’t seen Andor so I can’t comment, but I’ll take the plunge on your advice.
I think corporate “progressivism” is certainly one of the culprits, but sometimes it’s the creatives themselves who ruin things. Some creatives have even intentionally uprooted an IP like The Witcher’s show, and Rings of Power. Sometimes progressive ideals are merely a shield against criticism, other times it’s a creators’ own ideals that made them ruin things, and sometimes it’s just rainbow capitalism. It’s not a simple issue to talk about really.
I generally agree with you, with some caveats.
I think that most IPs have subtext, and a lot of time this is in the form of a deeper political message. I think it would be silly to say progressivism in IPs is always a bad thing. That’s part of the reason I mentioned Arcane and Spiderverse by name.
The problem comes from the fact that IPs are supposed to be entertainment first, messaging second. A lot of creators make a lazy and mediocre product, and somewhere in there is a ham-fisted political message. Some creators also seem to be making IPs bad on purpose as a fuck you to their target audience, which is an absolutely baffling choice.
There’s also the concept of nuance that’s sort of been lost. A lot of the creators will write something in some super reductive black/white way that’s basically guaranteed to turn off everyone who doesn’t already emphatically agree with them. This is a huge departure from a lot of older movies. For example Forrest Gump is a Republican movie, but doesn’t just portray republicans as automatically good or liberals as automatically bad. The end result is that there are a lot of liberals who love Forrest Gump.
The part that I strongly disagree on is that you seem to be blaming the corporations. I think ultimately a lot of the problem here is at the fault of the creators. There have been a lot of high profile cases where studios don’t interfere, give the creators a massive budget, and have their backs when controversy hits. The creators will still end up making mediocre culture war content. Todd Philips was allowed to do whatever he wanted in Joker 2. It turns out what Todd Philips wanted was for the Joker to be permanently defeated by the power of prison rape. There’s no studio head in the world who would have told him to do that.
I disagree with this:
The problem comes from the fact that IPs are supposed to be entertainment first, messaging second.
Maybe you just want entertainment, but the purpose of art has almost always been message-first. If a piece of art isn’t trying to say something, what’s the point? People trying to act like gaming, or any other form of art, should only focus on entertaining, and always has, are not very media-literate. I can’t think of a single classically well received movie that doesn’t have a message it’s trying to tell.
Nuance, yeah. That’s important. The goal of art is to get someone to feel like the idea you’re trying to give them came from themselves. That’s when it’s effective. It doesn’t really work when you’re just telling them how to think. It just annoys people.
Also, of course some garbage will also be made when people are allowed freedom to be creative. The difference is that good things can be made in that situation, not that it always will. It pretty much never will if everything is targeted towards mass appeal. That ensures no one in particular will care because there isn’t a target. They do it because it’s a safe bet. This implies the alternative is more risky, meaning more failures (like Joker 2), but also the opportunity for greatness.
To be fair I’m sure if it was stylish to insert overt conservative themes into IPs those would be also too.
I don’t think progressivism is the problem. I think the problem is mediocre creators either deciding to turn an expensive IP into their own political soapbox, and executives giving it the green light because they either are completely disconnected to what makes a good product or thinks the culture war will allow them to pretend that bad products are good.
Anyone who has ever read the Sword of Truth series and encountered the author’s obsession with hating socialism has seen what happens when right-wing folk do it: it ruins the experience.
And unions. Really drove that home when Richard was in the Old World.
Oh you have definitely read it. I come from a family of union men, and am myself a union executive. Reading that stuff felt surreal lol.
The one character that felt shoehorned in to me was Idris Elba as Roland in The Gunslinger. Why?! Handsome, buff, young and black are not adjectives anyone has ever used to describe Roland Deschain. LOL, King might as well come out and say he ripped the description off a 40-something Clint Eastwood.
There’s nothing wrong with calling a bad game woke if they’re trying to cover their blatant flaws by tokenizing minorities and lgbt. See: Concord
Picking a game that was already bad for 700 reasons doesn’t make the idiotic “woke = bad” label okay. The writing in a live service game was never going to be great.
Starfield is another good example.
Some of you may have seen HeelVsBabyface’s infamous “pronouns” rant video and taken it a bit out of context. Many said he was upset at the sight of a pronouns selection option on the character creation menu. His rant actually came a few hours into playing after a series of quests with incredibly contrived dialogue.
I really hate how too many games, and it’s games especially that do this feel the need to pretend that gender doesn’t exist.
I think part of what has happened is a group of people has identified that a lot of modern writing is garbage, but doesn’t know exactly what’s wrong with it. The issue gets blamed on whatever seems like the most obvious change to them. There are some stories with better writing that have a diverse set of characters, and while there are still weirdos on the internet that complain about it, the general market response suggests people are most interested in good media, and good media can represent a diverse range of people.
As for my take on modern writing, I think “design by committee”, by means of publishers and marketing specialists grasping more control over the creative process is the major culprit in its declining quality.
I realized this when I got into DBD and realized the game is in fact, very “woke”, and that it’s a core point of the game’s identity.
But it’s not a problem because it feels like a geniune effort by the Entity to capture a wide variety of survivors and killers from all walks of life, which translates into a lot of players able to look at the heroes and villains and go “Hey, s/he’s like me!”, which translates to putting in small things referencing sexualities and cultures to pander to those individuals.
The writing for all these characters are consistently good, except for when they aren’t (Looking at you Skull Merchant)
DBD IS a “Woke” game by every definition, but it isn’t shit and the story’s actually good because it’s clear the people making it give a shit about what they’re doing and the “woke” aspects simply come from exploring the ramifications of having the kind of cast it does.
I began to suspect it when people were bitching about how “Rey’s a giant Mary Sue!” in Star Wars
Because she isn’t. She actually LOSES most of the fights she’s in, can’t control her powers well for most of the films, and “How can she fly the Falcon so well!?!?!” was a common complaint even though she literally breaks the damn thing while doing so, meaning she can’t “fly it so well”, Rey as a character is clearly not the problem, but people latched onto her because she was something they could point to and say “HERE’S THE PROBLEM!”
So what WAS the problem with the sequels? The problem was they were so scared of doing something new with the Star Wars brand (Due to the fact that the prequels did something new and were lambasted for it) that they largely rehashed IV, V, and VI, without a plan for actually weaving one consistent story (Last Jedi and Rise of Skywalker are great movies… that feel like they belong in separate trilogies)
And yeah… that and I will agree with the bashers in that making Luke’s Jedi Order fail and killing off all of his students off-screen without introducing any of them was basically Disney throwing money away.
that’s horseshit. there is no such term for games that use sex to appeal to young boys to cover their blatant flaws.
plus that’s not why they’re doing it. two things can coexist without causing one another. that’s very disingenuous.
Don’t call it “Woke” though. Call it Faux Woke or Rainbow Capitalism. The term “Woke” carries specific baggage.
Remember the Dead Rising Remake that removes the erotica category from photos, changes Larry from being asian to being a new yorker (Cause Asians can’t be evil, unlike White people!), and removing all reference to the Vietnam War (Because Communists can’t be evil?)
Yeah… Dead Rising kept getting worse with every entry, but damn the fact that they went back and made the first game seem shitty is an accomplishment (Especially since between the Wii Version and the Remake, they did that twice!)
To be fair, what the OOP is describing is “diversity in the video game industry”, not “woke games”, per se. While I doubt anyone here has objections to the former, I also doubt that anyone here is a fan of “Dustborn”, as an example.
I hate this kind of comment. A bad game doing poorly that happens to be “woke” isn’t evidence that being “woke” made it bad. For example, Dragon Age Origins is pretty “woke” (especially for its time) but it’s recognized as an amazing game by pretty much everyone. If you make a great game that’s written well, it’s probably going to be received well. The issue is modern AAA gaming just makes mass audience slop that is devoid of passion and dictated by suits to chase trends. Being “woke” doesn’t matter. Being good matters.
deleted by creator
Dustborn is a good game that has been incredibly misrepresented. Take the “you are racist” scene copied and pasted from video to video for example. It’s presented as the game’s Black protagonist just accusing two cops of racism for no reason.
In the actual game, it’s one of the multiple dialogue choices that may not even happen if one of the protagonist’s friends intervenes. The context that is omitted from the culture war videos is that the protagonist comes out of the bathroom of a diner and sees two Justice officers:
- Talking about arresting her friends for no reason other than being tired of waiting for the waiter.
- Going on a long rant about Anomals (read as mutants of the X-Men, which is one of the inspirations behind the game), saying they’re monsters whose babies come out damaged, missing body parts, and that they shouldn’t procreate at all so that there are “fewer scourges on the planet”.
- Asking the protagonist questions (which is fine for a police officer) while being disrespectful, like when she says she’s in a band and they ask if she’s the groupie.
- Depending on the player’s actions, the same officers may also ask if the protagonist and “the Black kid” from her crew are related, then among themselves argue on whether that’s racist, to which the protagonist may reply with the Trigger Vox, which results in the “you’re racists” phrase.
Also worth noting that from the very first scenes of the game, the player is discouraged from using the special abilities, Vox, as they force people to do things against their will, so many players would never see that reaction intended to be over the top (as evident from the in-game post-chapter choice stats indicating that the majority don’t use Vox on other occasions).
I’m going to come at this from a movie rather than a video game place, but:
Which is more “woke:” Enemy Mine, or She-Hulk?
Enemy Mine is about a human and an alien (played by a white man and a black man) starting the movie as enemies. Actual shooting war “We were in a dogfight and I was trying to kill you with guns” enemies. And when marooned on an inhospitable planet they learn to understand and even love each other.
She-Hulk is about Nth-wave feminism talking points. “They catcalled me in a parking lot and it made me mad.”
You know that guy who does “honest movie trailers” on Youtube? He did one for Star Trek TNG, and he says “It’s the future, and the Future. Is. Woke!” And he said this before the word “woke” was co-opted by the right meaning “anything regressives don’t like.”
Gene Roddenberry had a vision for the future where we were past it all. Humanity is beyond racism, beyond sexism, beyond classism. Even if he couldn’t live up to it himself (He did put Marina Sirtis in a minidress and in a chair with no console in front of it to make it easy to look at her legs. And there was that really cringey episode where they go to the black people planet where everyone is all tribal and primitive, that was ugly) he aspired to that future. Probably the most powerful to me, he wrote characters who, when confronted on their ideas, would re-evaluate and even change their minds. Data called Picard out in “Measure of a Man” and Picard changed his stance and fought for what he now realized is the truth. That is the manliest moment ever broadcast on television.
I grew up with that show, I was born in 1987, same year the show premiered, some of my earliest memories is watching TNG on my parents’ Zenith console TV. That idea of “we’re past that now, we put aside our differences and we work together as a team of equals now” vision is what I thought we were all working toward. That that was the future we all wanted. Couldn’t be farther from the truth. The radical right are actively avoiding it clinging to some weird idea of a white hegemony. Surprised they don’t call the invention of the diesel powered tractor an affront to their heritage because it deprives them of a reason to harm black people.
Most other groups of people are busy fantasizing about having their turn as the despotic rulers. “When we come to power, we’ll enslave you and see how you like it.” That type of shit.The people who call themselves “Woke” like the aesthetic of people who aren’t straight and/or white and/or male doing creative things, but the things they create are basically never about everyone learning to get along and building better futures for each other. They make talking point grievance airing revenge porn and dare their targets to dislike it.
That idea of “we’re past that now, we put aside our differences and we work together as a team of equals now” vision is what I thought we were all working toward. That that was the future we all wanted. Couldn’t be farther from the truth. The radical right are actively avoiding it clinging to some weird idea of a white hegemony
This is true about Star Trek, and the TNG era in particular. No way you could watch those shows and not come away with the understanding that people struggled to be the better human being and had achieved significant gains in the fictional universe.
I wonder what TV shows the racists preferred.
When a game puts it in your face that this character is is gay/trans/ethnic in a way that feels arbitrary to the setting or effected character, it comes off very much like a political move for sales.
Let’s use soldier 76 from overwatch as an example. The way he was written on top of the are they aren’t they thing he had going on with Ana didn’t support him being gay at all. The announcement that he is gay came completely randomly and really fealt like a political move to add a little more representation.
On the other hand, we have good characters who happen to be LGBT, Ellie from the last of us, or my personal favorite Veronica from New Vegas.
I agree with you, slapping a veneer of diverse identity on a character post-facto is often just performative bullshit. At best it’s bad representation, at worst it’s cynical pinkwashing and pandering for profit.
But that’s not a distinction I have ever seen an “anti-woke gamer” railing against.
What I do see them railing against is any representation in games that does not pander to their own personal preferences.
Did you not encounter any of the backlash to Ellie’s sexuality? Honestly I think FNV only escapes a lot of that kind of vitriol because it was released pre-gg.
I won’t disagree that Soldier’s gayness came pretty much out of the blue, but I don’t think it’s a good example of something that was “put it in our face”. I play Overwatch regularly still with people who have no idea he’s gay - the game itself doesn’t say anything about it, at least not that I’ve seen. The only way you’d know originally is if you followed Overwatch social media or read the blog post they announced it in, something that only a small fraction of players actually do.
good characters who happen to be (whatever)
There it is!
Oh, this Lara Croft chick has to be a strong, independent woman, huh? Tired of shit like this and Metroid. Quit hamfisting women into things and virtue signalling
Never, ever, not in the entire 90’s decade I was alive did I even hear anything remotely similar to anything like that. It was unheard of.
No one even thought about it like that, or even had the concept to consider them that way.
…until 2016
They gave Lara depth and humanized her, and this made the horny gamer boys angry cause they just wanted to look at boobies and not think too much.
She had all that in the PS2 era and none of us cared then.
those games were also kinda mid…
I’m just tired of being lectured in video games. Sorry if that makes me anti woke.
Spiderman 2, veilguard were both worse off because of poorly done DEI. BG3 was fantastic and created characters that weren’t talking about pronouns like I’m a 5 year old. Sorry not sorry.
Please choose body type:
- Body Type 1 (with large shoulders and no ass)
- Body Type 2 (with large ass and boobs)
Ah yes, progressive inclusiveness. So much better!
You only have to look at any anti-woke review for a few seconds to figure out it’s only ever racism, misogyny, and anti lgbtq hate. They aren’t like ‘‘This is why it’s woke’’ with some philosophical discussion, it straight up is ‘‘there’s a black in this game, that’s wrong.’’
This was very evident with Concord the week it shut down. People in the YT comments were inevitably blaming woke politics because it had an arguably diverse cast even though the trailer was one of the most bland, unimaginative and unpolished pieces of advertisement I’ve ever seen. Oh, but it was the blue haired people’s fault for reasons! 🙄
I’m gonna get the quote wrong, so I wont even try, but some internet person basically said that any time there’s a failure, the worse people will come out to claim it as a victory.
Game had cringe writing and was glitchy as hell? Oh, well it was the minority characters that caused it fail. Just ignore all the other games with minority characters that have succeeded.
Remember when Sierra had to hire an outside company to do King’s Quest 8, and they completely ignored Roberta Williams’ notes, instructions, and design simply because “You’re a woman, you don’t know anything about games, shut up and let us work. This is going to be an RPG, not an Adventure game, and you’re going to like it little lady!.. Who is also the wife of the owner, the co-founder of the company, and the creator+headwriter of the series we’re currently working for.”
And it kept happening no matter how much she complained, so eventually they had to kick them out, but there wasn’t enough time to make a new game so the “Not King’s Quest” King’s Quest game had to be released to try to make money back…
And it was basically a shitty version of Ultima 9, an already shitty game, and was so bad and tonally out of place with the rest of the series that the King’s Quest Collection on Steam only has 1-7 and the Reboot?
Yeah I normally like to root for the underdog game of a franchise and try to defend it, but KQ8: Mask of Eternity can get fucked.
I’m not even a King’s Quest fan, but it’s one of the most infuriating cases of sexism I’ve ever had the displeasure of learning about.
Imagine this happening in any other context. Imagine Square Enix hires a bunch of white guys to do Dragon Quest, sends in a higher-up to make sure it stays on brand, and they just tell him “You’re asian, what do you know about good games?”, and turn in a grimdark first person shooter that just happens to be called Dragon Quest, and Square Enix is in such a dire financial state that they’re forced to publish it as a mainline entry.
That’s basically what happened.
Jeez. I played and enjoyed that game as a kid, but I had no idea why it was such a bastardized tonal shift from the other games.
There are two kinds of wokeness I complain about:
-
Hernia level virtue signaling - this is when a production company is straining super hard to make sure we know they’re the good guys, but the writers don’t have the brains to come up with interesting allegories, or even super-transparent ones like the half-black/half-white dudes in the TOS episode. All they can muster up is character dialog like, “Wow, look how backward this time period is! So much misogyny and discrimination!” Yeah duh, I live in this time period and I’m not stupid. (talking to you, Picard season 2)
-
Misrepresenting the past - this is when they portray let’s say Victorian England or 1950s America as a fully integrated society where characters of all races mix freely, with equality at all levels. That’s not how it was, kids. The black housewife in 1953 Ohio would not have a white maid, although she might work part time as one in a white household. You don’t raise social consciousness by painting a fake picture of history to avoid upsetting your audience. That does no service to the people who still feel the effects of those times.
But oh right, I forgot, the point is profit not genuine social consciousness - sorry, my bad.
/edited for grammar
While I agree with your first point - corporate pseudo-progressivism is a stain - I don’t really think it’s fair to call it “woke”. In fact, it’s almost the opposite of what woke is supposed to mean. To be “woke” originally meant having “woken up” to the reality of systemic racism… Corpos thoughtlessly stuffing games/films with “diverse” casts are not really respecting that reality. It’s performative. There is an argument that it improved things for actors regardless, but I still don’t think it’s “woke”.
On your second point I have to slightly disagree. Taking Bridgerton as an example - set in something like Victorian England, but a racially diverse one. The Queen is black, there’s a black Duke. I think these things immediately set the story apart from real Victorian England. Ok, perhaps if you know nothing about history it might be confusing, but to me I see those things and immediately one of two things is true:
- We are suspending our disbelief. Just like the pantomime dame, within the world of the play, is a woman and not a man in costume, we can assume that we’re seeing black actors playing characters who would have really been white… Like Queen victoria.
- The world we see is not an accurate representation of history. In this world we might assume that slavery was abolished sooner, or never started, and black people moved not just into the lower but the higher echelons of British society.
Given that it’s fiction, I don’t mind either of these things. I think it’s nice for people who aren’t white to be able to imagine themselves in those stories, even if in the real history things would have been much different. Bridgerton isn’t trying to present a vision of real historical events, it’s primarily a romance. Just like mediaeval fantasy isn’t really medieval, Victorian romance doesn’t need to really be Victorian. We don’t need to see the systemic racism any more than we need to see the cholera or dropsy or whatever.
I will also just briefly shill for Taboo which I just finished - that’s a historical show which incorporates a “realistic” amount of diversity into it’s cast while maintaining (at least what appears to me) a level of historical accuracy. The story is fictional, although it appears around real events… But the world it presents feels genuine. Crucially by contrast to Bridgerton, slavery plays quite an important role in the story - so here it would feel absurd to have a black Queen or Duke.
Haven’t seen Taboo but Bridgerton is a fantasy alt world - it can have steam-powered computers for all I care. My objection is specifically about falsely portraying real eras for the sake of casting diversity, which I think is a disservice to people who were held down in those real eras.
Fair enough, I have seen the same arguments applied to it is why I used it as an example. I don’t know what shows you are thinking of, but are they misrepresenting things, or are they just using blind casting and asking you to suspend your disbelief? This is something we do without thinking when watching theatre, but it’s a bit more subtle when watching television or films because they go to lengths to make the environment feel more real.
Suspension of disbelief is great for science fiction and fantasy, but I don’t think it’s healthy to mask past realities. I don’t believe for one second anybody does “blind” casting - entertainment companies pander to what they think their audience’s main demographic wants, and they do extensive research to tell them what that is. They want to be on the audience’s side on every issue, support all the right things, criticize all the right things… there’s nothing blind or random about any of it.
Perhaps, or perhaps the casting team had other goals that aren’t so obvious. While it’s true there are purely capitalistic production firms, there are clearly things being made with artistic vision behind them, and sometimes that includes blind casting. Again, I suspect this is more prevalent in theatre, where audiences are more willing to accept, say, a woman playing King Lear, or black actors playing nobles in a historical setting. Because, on stage, you are already suspending lots of that disbelief - you’re not looking into a throne room, you’re looking at a stage - it’s easier to take it a step further.
But while less is asked of you when watching a historical drama on TV, you are nonetheless suspending your disbelief. You know really that cameras couldn’t have filmed this in the Victorian era, that’s not really Henry VIII, and Jesus wasn’t a white guy. The question is what makes it too jarring for you?
I noticed you’re quite focused on the production company’s intent behind the casting. Maybe it’s politically/philosophically motivated, maybe purely capitalist, or maybe artistic… But you can’t really know. And should it even matter to you as the viewer? I understand trying to unpick the artistic decisions behind a piece, but those of the production company? That doesn’t seem like something to bring into your viewing experience - just perhaps conversations like this one on the internet.
I’d invite you to try suspending your disbelief as you might when watching the Passion of the Christ, and see if you’re able to enjoy these films/shows despite the historical inaccuracies.
Okay here’s my background - I’ve been involved in over 20 stage productions as an actor, director, assistant director, designer, set builder, and various other tech positions. This doesn’t make me an expert but it means I’ve been there and done that. I’ve seen Midsummer Night’s Dream done with 1930s gangsters, an all-black MacBeth in Stratford, England, and I was stage manager for a Comedy of Errors in a Hollywood Squares style set with a cigarette-smoking nun playing a piano. I understand suspension of disbelief, so you don’t need invite me to try it like you’re talking a kid about broccoli.
Casting directors do not cast “blind” except background crowds, and even then the overall look and feel is as important as paint scheme and set decoration. I imagine this is even more true in television and movies, where there’s a lot more money at stake and a lot more people to please. They carefully control every element they can - if only because every person in those coveted positions is striving to prove how indispensible they are. Nothing is done at random except for occasional quick one-off decisions. I don’t object to comic anachronisms like throwing WWII German soldiers and Count Basie’s orchestra into Blazing Saddles. I’m talking about serious stories where everything seems to be meticulously recreated except the painful elements of society are being whitewashed for the sake of pleasing modern-day sensibilities.
Suspension of disbelief only has meaning for an audience that already has knowledge of the material, but today’s audiences generally know very little about history except what they see in movies and on TV. You probably aren’t even aware that about 1 out of 4 cowboys in the Old West era were black. Ranch work was something a lot of freed slaves took up after the Civil War. But having grown up with American movies and TV, my mental version of the Wild West is almost all-white - with the odd asian cook, or an occasional black dude sweeping up in a saloon. I bet yours is similar. That’s why I criticize the current trend of misrepresenting history as a carefully balanced well-integrated society. Whatever the reason, it’s just a different generation trying to please audiences. Like every generation the one currently doing most of the creative work in Hollywood thinks it’s more enlightened than every other one before it, which is another crock of shit. One delusion in the collective consciousness is no better than another.
I understand suspension of disbelief, so you don’t need invite me to try it like you’re talking a kid about broccoli.
Haha, ok, I wasn’t trying to be patronising - my suggestion was that you try suspending you disbelief in situations where you otherwise might not. Clearly you know what it is, I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise. Jumping ahead a bit to another relevant part of your comment…
Suspension of disbelief only has meaning for an audience that already has knowledge of the material
Where I am suggesting you might suspend your disbelief is exactly that - a situation where you have knowledge that the world you’re seeing is inaccurate. Anyway, I don’t mean to come across as condescending, sorry about that.
Casting directors do not cast “blind” except background crowds, and even then the overall look and feel is as important as paint scheme and set decoration.
Blind casting doesn’t mean you have to have no artistic vision. It just means you aren’t concerned with, for example, the gender or race of the actor. I saw a production of the Little Prince a while ago where the titular prince was played by a woman. Now, given the storyline (which was presented more or less true to the book) I think it’s clear that there was no philosophical motivation behind the casting… She was just small. I’m sure it was a conscious decision to cast someone small, but do you really think they specifically wanted a woman? I doubt it.
I’m talking about serious stories where everything seems to be meticulously recreated except the painful elements of society are being whitewashed for the sake of pleasing modern-day sensibilities
This specific situation I can understand. The reason I was inclined to argue with your original point, and why I jumped to Bridgerton as an example, is that I have usually seen these arguments presented in relation to things just like Bridgerton, where they really have no place… So, do you have an example?
I’d also ask, given your example, what your perspective is on modern Cowboy films still presenting the old west as predominantly white?
You took the words out of my mouth, both of those are such libshit that I cringe my asshole out.
That’s another aspect of it - those practices aren’t “libshit” they’re corporate shit. Same as sticking a big GREEN label on random products.
Ya know, there’s a scene in The Boys where Maeve is outed as a bisexual, so they decide to promote her queerness as part of a “Brave Maeve” campaign to encourage those in the closet to come out.
But then they tell her she has to be a lesbian, not bisexual, because bisexuality is “too confusing”, and even then they police what behaviors she is and is not allowed to do; she can be a lesbian but not “too gay”, and she’s only allowed to date feminine individuals while presenting as masculine or vice versa because to do otherwise is to “send the wrong message”
This basically ruins her life, forces her girlfriend to break up with her because she can’t take having to be a “Model Minority” at all times, and Maeve is left so broken she almost reveals the fact that she and Homelander don’t actually save people to the whole world.
When I saw that, I was like “Holy shit, finally, someone else who understands why I, a transgender woman, actively avoid media that caters to the LGBT community. Finally, SOMEONE gets it and they’re making sure other people get it too.”
-
As much as I despise the “anti-woke” crowd, this is not a good argument and completely misunderstands what they’re angry about.
They are angry about what they perceive as “forced diversity” that destroys modern media and that corporates like Disney are pushing a “woke agenda”.
I disagree with this view. I think representation in media is good. Games and movies usually turn bad for unrelated reasons (like rushed production or poor management).
I’m just going to say that a lot of creative, innovative, or interesting things, regardless if they’re physical items, narratives, gameplay mechanics, or even just a new process for handling a particular task, is borne from diversity.
We are different. That difference is a strength. The more different we are, the larger of a gap between how I approach an issue and how you do the same. The Delta between your approach and mine is beautiful. One may be more efficient, one may be easier, one might be less expensive to do.
If we all thought the same, and we were extremely similar in what we knew and how we thought, nothing would ever change. Progress would not be possible.
A great example of this is with the blue LED. Most companies have been able to make blue LEDs for decades. The problem is, they were expensive, and shit. They couldn’t brighten up a shoe box.
One guy took a blue LED manufacturing process that everyone else abandoned, and worked with it for the better part of like, 5 years or something. He invented the modern blue LED in all its glory. Bright enough to blind you from across the room, and cheap enough to produce that they ended up in a lot of places they probably shouldn’t have been. That experimentation also yielded a near ultraviolet version that with a simply phosphor filter, can be converted to visible light, and white LEDs were born
Yeah, and the guy that invented the blue LED - essentially saving the company - got shit upon because he did so against the orders of the company head. They then went after him legally when he took a job at another company.
He actually won a lawsuit against them later but my understanding is that after legal fees etc didn’t really come out ahead. It’s a pretty sad story.
Diversity in entertainment is important, and ultimately done right it’s also good for profits. Having a game, movie or produce that appeals to a broader audience is good for sales.
At the same time, some entertainment does come with an existing core audience and a bit of a “formula”, so altering that too much does risk alienating that core, and frankly some duds get blamed on 'ism when the reality is they’re just not that good or changed too much. “The Witcher” flubbed because those writing the scripts were increasingly out of touch with the original material, but if they’d also done something like make a Geralt (or somebody else significant) a different orientation, race, gender or whatever then some would have blamed that failure on the anti-diversity crowd.
There’s been a ton of Blame on both the show being ‘woke’ and the internet hate machine. The first season was pretty good imo, well done outside he fact it was a TV show with limited resources. But the second season was so badly written. You can change all you want as far as I care, but they wrote that season after completely ignoring who any of the characters were in season 1. And giving them intentionally the opposite personality, and motivations from the books they were supposed to be adapting. It was just bizarre, and insulting to watch, I get why Cavill bailed, anyone with the financial means should have done the same.
But it wasn’t because they had black actors, female characters that talked and wore clothes, or mentioned empathy, and it didn’t fall out of favor with audiences because internet trolls stank on it. It was just badly done in ways that felt lazy and dumb.
deleted by creator
A game that’s got well written characters representing minorities or which includes political theming and executes it well (e.g. Bioshock, Fallout 2 or Disco Elysium) is more woke than any other. That kind of game’s core concept is to make a strong point about structural injustice in society.
Games with token representation or the plot is thin but the main character is a woman so you’re sexist of you don’t buy it are generally not woke at all. They’re only pretending to be as a marketing strategy. They’re not doing anything to make anyone think about structural injustice in society, and are instead appealing to the common don’t be horrible to groups that it was normal to be horrible to decades ago that their market research team determined were already agreed with by most of their potential customers. It’s just capitalism noticing that mysogynists etc. are no longer the largest demographic and being very unsubtle when signalling that the product thinks women are people.
There are a small number of very vocal people who complain about both kinds of game. They don’t want people to acknowledge that treating women as people is now the default, but even more than that, they don’t want people to play Bioshock as then if they’re shown anything by Ayn Rand, they’ll be immediately able to spot the flawed logic on her philosophy. They’re careful to make sure to present it as if they’re only complaining about the virtue-signalling-as-marketing kind as everyone recognises that they’re generally crap, so it makes it look like they’re making a reasonable argument. It also means people amplify the argument, but by using phrases like woke instead of badly written it makes it easier to correctly label well-written games containing politics they disagree with as woke, too, and have people make the association with being badly written annoying slop by themselves, without having people who’ve played the game point out that it is well-written and someone saying otherwise is an idiot.
deleted by creator
Hey buddy, turning every response into a recitation of the “List of Fallacies” poster you likely have up above your monitor doesn’t mean you’re “winning”. If you have an actual point to make, just make it and stop debating how people debate.
deleted by creator
I’m happy to continue the conversation constructively
Lol, good one.
My position isn’t rooted in a denial of history but in the belief that games, music, and films are creative, self-contained domains to be enjoyed on their own merits—not as platforms for political messaging.
The issue here is that every time I see someone complaining that a game is “woke” is when suddenly there are gay people, or people of colour, or women not looking like a hooters waitress in the game. And the reality here is that this isn’t being woke, it’s that the game is being based on reality. Gay people exist, always have, so do people of colour, and women of all types and men too. The people that make it political are the people that don’t want to see the real world and the people in it.
Now, I don’t know what you feel is “woke” and I’m not saying this is directed at you, but just because there are people that don’t fit some preconceived mold, and they are included in a game, doesn’t make it magically political.
deleted by creator
Oh look, the Cultural Marxism conspiracy theory.
I think you’ve been consuming too much Jordan Petersen.
That whole theory was rooted in anti-semitism and some weird mistrust that Jews were imposing culture on them. It’s the biggest load of baloney.
deleted by creator
like the oppressor-oppressed dynamic, which can be traced to Marxian economics, Critical Theory, and intersectionality. These are well-documented academic concepts
Provide the documentation. What does intersectionality have to do with Marxian economics? What authors have you read who discuss both?
deleted by creator
Have you read Women, Race and Class?
A combination of: Marxian economics—specifically the framework of oppressor and oppressed—applied to social categories such as gender, race, and sexuality + Critical Theory from the Frankfurt School.
bro who is putting that in video games
deleted by creator
Marxian economics—specifically the framework of oppressor and oppressed—applied to social categories such as gender, race, and sexuality + Critical Theory from the Frankfurt School.
These have always been present in history, both in fact and fiction. Greeks vs Persians, Amazonians, China vs Western world (think Opium Wars and Boxer revolution), etc… These issues have always been there, this isn’t something new to the modern world and there are stories that have been around just as long with these same subjects.
This sudden overcompensation of swapping the gender, sexuality or race of characters in movies and games, under the guise of “celebrating diversity,” often feels less like a meaningful or thoughtful inclusion and more like a superficial, performative gesture. This trend is widespread and politically charged, driven not by genuine artistic intent but by a desire to align with current cultural trends.
Or it matches the more modern world. Today, more people can travel and move to different countries. More and more places have more and more people of different backgrounds, race, gender, sexuality that are in the public view. To not put these people in is to not understand today’s world and the people in it. Go outside and really look around, see how many people now don’t look like you, don’t dress like you and/or don’t act like you. Also, keep in mind where the games you are comparing them to are made, and understand what the developers see in their day to day life because that is more in line with what they’d know.
Mmm
