It sometimes creates queerness as an option rather than a core part of an experience
Because, surprise surprise, most non-romance games don’t have romance as significant part of the game. You don’t get straight tailored experience in Skyrim either. Unless you believe killing bandits or mammoths is how you romance a straight person.
kind of a cop out
This mentality is why so many gamers outside the homophobic conservative circles are pissed at game developers and groups like Sweet Baby Inc. Not cramming gender politics into a game that has nothing to do with them is not a cop out. It is good game design. Skyrim is not a romance simulator and it shouldn’t be turned into one just to “be more inclusive”.
Hey, just a heads up assuming “gender politics” don’t matter and being upset if a character is noticeably queer - makes you a part of the homophobic conservative circles. People, irl are queer, omitting queer people from settings where they would just exist as part of the world because “they shouldn’t be there” is a little queerphobic.
Conservative circles have been screaming about woke games forever just when options to have non-binary people exist at character creation or when there is one gay side character. A lot of folks in the arts, including in game development, are queer and like to make stories that didn’t exist when they were growing up. Your opinion is your own but assuming it’s universally considered “good game design” to force developers to exclude the things they are passionate to put in their games to appease a howling mob that is never happy even when they get what they say they want is a bit rich.
No. Not wanting to have your car stolen by a gay person does not make you a homophobe. It just makes you a normal person that doesn’t want to be stolen from. Equally, wanting a game to be entertainment, not political messaging does not make you conservative.
Most people had no issue with diverse characters that are part of a game, see Life is Strange. They do when you turn a game into political PSA at the expense of the rest of the game, see Valeguard.
Ah yes, the two sexualities - political and non-political. You really aren’t as far along as you think.
I can accept that you are unhappy and want your games to not make you feel uncomfortable. Gods forbid they ever be like every other form of media and actually have a message they want to convey or try anything new. I can say having something tailored specifically for you is quite nice - now that more of us actually get to experience that.
and want your games to not make you feel uncomfortable.
You are missing the point entirely. Playing as a homosexual character did not make me feel uncomfortable, even though I understand if it did for some people. Even so, not every game is for everyone. It is fine to have games focused at different audiences.
But when you hand over writing your game characters and story to groups like SBI, whose only qualification is “inclusive writing”, than it destroys games for everyone and you get entirely justified backlash from gamers.
Same if you take an established franchise and change the target audience.
Unfortunately, just like you don’t make distinction between the actual homophobes and people who just want good writing and game design, a lot of gamers once pissed of don’t distinguish between good inclusion and forced, badly executed one. And than you get the polarized BS of today.
There’s no “actual homophobes” vs " not homophobic but still unhappy that queer people and ‘forced inclusion’ are in a game people" - that’s just different degrees of homophobia.
Games changed a bit so that they aren’t all made for you specifically. Those franchises didn’t belong to you and for some people those ‘ruined games’ are their favorite games. Everyone has studios they don’t like. Not all representation is gunna be great because not all writing is going to be great but when inclusion “ruins it for everyone” in your veiw look around and ask if the people around you who are discussing it is actually a good cross section of “everyone”.
There’s no “actual homophobes” vs " not homophobic but still unhappy that queer people and ‘forced inclusion’ are in a game people"
That’s the same kind of argument as saying criticizing Israeli genocide is antisemitism. There are objectively bad things done in the name of inclusion. Criticizing them is not homophobic. If you are going to pretend they are, that you are somehow above criticism just because your stated goal is noble, don’t be surprised when people turn against you.
Are these “bad things in the name of inclusion” just making a game you don’t like? The push against “inclusion” on a general scale has lead to real world harms because a bunch of babies can’t come to terms with there being pieces of media with choices they don’t like and threw a fucking tantrum. There isn’t really a side anymore where railing against the harms of “inclusion” isn’t propping up the arguement that minorities “earned” the actions against them by asking “too much”.
People will take your words as tacit endorsement that queer people “had this coming” because a bunch of businesses responded to a body of queer theory and made some fucking games. The anti-DEI crowd is the Conservative crowd and you might be on the fringe but you aren’t outside the radius.
People will take your words as tacit endorsement that queer people “had this coming” because a bunch of businesses responded to a body of queer theory and made some fucking games.
That is exactly why your stance is pissing me off so much. People like you, who don’t care how their ideas impact other people as long as they are inclusive, are pushing massive amounts of people towards the conservative side of the argument. I don’t think that makes those people conservative, for some reason you do. Regardless, we both agree it hurts queer people.
So was it worth it? A bunch of poorly written queer characters in games and movies in exchange for pissing off a portion of otherwise tolerant population and pushing it towards conservatism?
Because, surprise surprise, most non-romance games don’t have romance as significant part of the game. You don’t get straight tailored experience in Skyrim either. Unless you believe killing bandits or mammoths is how you romance a straight person.
This mentality is why so many gamers outside the homophobic conservative circles are pissed at game developers and groups like Sweet Baby Inc. Not cramming gender politics into a game that has nothing to do with them is not a cop out. It is good game design. Skyrim is not a romance simulator and it shouldn’t be turned into one just to “be more inclusive”.
Hey, just a heads up assuming “gender politics” don’t matter and being upset if a character is noticeably queer - makes you a part of the homophobic conservative circles. People, irl are queer, omitting queer people from settings where they would just exist as part of the world because “they shouldn’t be there” is a little queerphobic.
Conservative circles have been screaming about woke games forever just when options to have non-binary people exist at character creation or when there is one gay side character. A lot of folks in the arts, including in game development, are queer and like to make stories that didn’t exist when they were growing up. Your opinion is your own but assuming it’s universally considered “good game design” to force developers to exclude the things they are passionate to put in their games to appease a howling mob that is never happy even when they get what they say they want is a bit rich.
No. Not wanting to have your car stolen by a gay person does not make you a homophobe. It just makes you a normal person that doesn’t want to be stolen from. Equally, wanting a game to be entertainment, not political messaging does not make you conservative.
Most people had no issue with diverse characters that are part of a game, see Life is Strange. They do when you turn a game into political PSA at the expense of the rest of the game, see Valeguard.
Ah yes, the two sexualities - political and non-political. You really aren’t as far along as you think.
I can accept that you are unhappy and want your games to not make you feel uncomfortable. Gods forbid they ever be like every other form of media and actually have a message they want to convey or try anything new. I can say having something tailored specifically for you is quite nice - now that more of us actually get to experience that.
You are missing the point entirely. Playing as a homosexual character did not make me feel uncomfortable, even though I understand if it did for some people. Even so, not every game is for everyone. It is fine to have games focused at different audiences.
But when you hand over writing your game characters and story to groups like SBI, whose only qualification is “inclusive writing”, than it destroys games for everyone and you get entirely justified backlash from gamers.
Same if you take an established franchise and change the target audience.
Unfortunately, just like you don’t make distinction between the actual homophobes and people who just want good writing and game design, a lot of gamers once pissed of don’t distinguish between good inclusion and forced, badly executed one. And than you get the polarized BS of today.
There’s no “actual homophobes” vs " not homophobic but still unhappy that queer people and ‘forced inclusion’ are in a game people" - that’s just different degrees of homophobia.
Games changed a bit so that they aren’t all made for you specifically. Those franchises didn’t belong to you and for some people those ‘ruined games’ are their favorite games. Everyone has studios they don’t like. Not all representation is gunna be great because not all writing is going to be great but when inclusion “ruins it for everyone” in your veiw look around and ask if the people around you who are discussing it is actually a good cross section of “everyone”.
That’s the same kind of argument as saying criticizing Israeli genocide is antisemitism. There are objectively bad things done in the name of inclusion. Criticizing them is not homophobic. If you are going to pretend they are, that you are somehow above criticism just because your stated goal is noble, don’t be surprised when people turn against you.
Are these “bad things in the name of inclusion” just making a game you don’t like? The push against “inclusion” on a general scale has lead to real world harms because a bunch of babies can’t come to terms with there being pieces of media with choices they don’t like and threw a fucking tantrum. There isn’t really a side anymore where railing against the harms of “inclusion” isn’t propping up the arguement that minorities “earned” the actions against them by asking “too much”.
People will take your words as tacit endorsement that queer people “had this coming” because a bunch of businesses responded to a body of queer theory and made some fucking games. The anti-DEI crowd is the Conservative crowd and you might be on the fringe but you aren’t outside the radius.
That is exactly why your stance is pissing me off so much. People like you, who don’t care how their ideas impact other people as long as they are inclusive, are pushing massive amounts of people towards the conservative side of the argument. I don’t think that makes those people conservative, for some reason you do. Regardless, we both agree it hurts queer people.
So was it worth it? A bunch of poorly written queer characters in games and movies in exchange for pissing off a portion of otherwise tolerant population and pushing it towards conservatism?