How can "gamers" and "social justice warriors" get along?
- Thread starter Burnouts3s3
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Hence why I reffered to them as "people" and not SJWs. Whilst "social justice" is the topic at hand and not just the act of demanding diversity.Zachary Amaranth said:
ie. those people who do that thing I don't like
Not for me to say, or anyone to say. Different people have different ways of making their feelings known.MarsAtlas said:
Well depending on the writer....actually.MarsAtlas said:
And asking THAT question is fine. It does deserve an answer.MarsAtlas said:
In terms of creative control it creates issues.
If the creator of Rust doesn't to see half-naked men beating up half-naked women in his game, that's his choice.
MarsAtlas said:
Yes and I agree with that. I said as much back here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.855578-How-can-gamers-and-social-justice-warriors-get-along?page=4#21189748]. Any company that makes excuses like that deserves flack.MarsAtlas said:
Do they even count as boogeymen/women/etc if all they do is complain and can't do shit?IceForce said:
You can't reason with Social Justice Warriors.
If they were reasonable, intelligent people they wouldn't have a label like "Social Justice Warriors"
sure, this doesn't apply to all of them, and gamers aren't any better.
If there's a group that's labeled you should just leave them be. Or watch from a far and laugh like they're all taking part in an elaborate comedy sketch for your benefit.
See the reason it's futile is because there already is middle ground for them to meet on in gaming. but social justice warriors think "Every portrayal of women is sexist!" and gamers are like "My entertainment is worth belittling your entire gender!" or at least that's how each side sees the other.
IF there was a way to make these two sides see that the other one has a good point or two they would have done so by now...
the problem is that their mutual antagonism is what gives them their meaning. reaching a middle ground or *Gasp* solving the problem is the last thing either side wants because it's the other side's opinion that is the problem, not the issue its self. 'Cause I've seen it happen (It's happened to me) where if a member of one side does meet them half way their response isn't "I'm glad we agree on that" it's "If I'm right about that I'm obviously right about everything else so you're a hypocrite if you don't agree with everything else I said"
The moral of the story is if you're a reasonable person with a brain (Or even a half a brain) don't take sides in stupid internet arguments
If they were reasonable, intelligent people they wouldn't have a label like "Social Justice Warriors"
sure, this doesn't apply to all of them, and gamers aren't any better.
If there's a group that's labeled you should just leave them be. Or watch from a far and laugh like they're all taking part in an elaborate comedy sketch for your benefit.
See the reason it's futile is because there already is middle ground for them to meet on in gaming. but social justice warriors think "Every portrayal of women is sexist!" and gamers are like "My entertainment is worth belittling your entire gender!" or at least that's how each side sees the other.
IF there was a way to make these two sides see that the other one has a good point or two they would have done so by now...
the problem is that their mutual antagonism is what gives them their meaning. reaching a middle ground or *Gasp* solving the problem is the last thing either side wants because it's the other side's opinion that is the problem, not the issue its self. 'Cause I've seen it happen (It's happened to me) where if a member of one side does meet them half way their response isn't "I'm glad we agree on that" it's "If I'm right about that I'm obviously right about everything else so you're a hypocrite if you don't agree with everything else I said"
The moral of the story is if you're a reasonable person with a brain (Or even a half a brain) don't take sides in stupid internet arguments
I think neo-conservatives are a "plague" (I actually don't, because I don't actually think of anyone in these terms) even though I agree with the notion that it'd be nice if everyone could live in a democracy. Their way to go about this causes however so much problems that the bad they create far outweighs the good they are trying to achieve.MarsAtlas said:
Besides that, I vehemently disagree with the notion that the AC games don't have a strong focus on historical accuracy (for a videogame series at least), instead they took relatively great care to at least attempt to correctly represent the majority of aspects of the time the games are set in that don't explicitly clash with the more super-natural or gamey aspects of the series (and even the majority of the plot stuff is depicted in a way it might have still happened). Furthermore, AC protagonists have always been clearly defined characters who are influenced by their surrounding society and specific life-story (although usually in a bland way) and I think gender (while a social construct) is too big a part of a person's identity to be completely left out in a long-form personal narrative, so I don't think the game could implement that level of customization without either greatly increasing its development costs or fundamentally changing the kind of experience it wants to offer.
Does that mean I want another bland white dude as the protagonist of ACU? Fuck no, I want Ubisoft to actually do something interesting for a change and create a female protagonist in one of the main entries of the series and have that reflected in story and gameplay with the same thoughtfulness they showed in the way they handled playing non-whites in racist societies in their DLC and Spin-Off.
There's a difference between "Disliking" and comparing something to a plague. Frankly even if he did agree with the goals but disagree with the methods I still would take offense at the plague term.Lovely Mixture said:
I'm sorry, I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Unless you're talking about transsexualism.
War? I'm sorry, didn't you just criticize me for making assumptions about people? I didn't have a war with this guy. I saw him talking in a forum, I know his views on the subject. That's it.
The answer is people need to understand there is a Market for everything and people DO NOT have the right to say something shouldn't Exist because of their own stuck up values. It's like saying things like Playboy shouldn't exist or 50 shades of grey or Anita."
Dragon's crown and Gone home have shown games catering to both "omg boobs and this game is actual awesome" can be popular and successful, as well as Gone home "Walking simulator with -edgy- opinions for the 1990's and SJW bait can be successful.
Big publishes and stuff are increasing going for "The middle ground" to get sales with more and more games going character creation and pick your whatever more then ever before.
Niche titles on the other hand are free to do what they please and However much STINK EYE you want to give them, if it's successful and their is a market for it, It hurts no one and makes people happy.
Dragon's crown and Gone home have shown games catering to both "omg boobs and this game is actual awesome" can be popular and successful, as well as Gone home "Walking simulator with -edgy- opinions for the 1990's and SJW bait can be successful.
Big publishes and stuff are increasing going for "The middle ground" to get sales with more and more games going character creation and pick your whatever more then ever before.
Niche titles on the other hand are free to do what they please and However much STINK EYE you want to give them, if it's successful and their is a market for it, It hurts no one and makes people happy.
I'm sorry, I'm going to have to call foul. Bully and repress people? When a woman can't even criticize GTA V for not having good female characters and get rape threats over it, EVEN THOUGH SHE GAVE IT A NINE OUT OF TEN, I have to question whom is bullying whom here.Res Plus said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABiPHyaKgTw
EDIT: What's more, I know we like to pick on COD fans, but I seriously doubt that people who buy games like that are responsible for stagnation in the industry. The industry needs to stop treating games as products if we're ever going to get some real innovation.
As I understood it from the press releases and the E3 video, your co-op character (as it appears to the other players) is actually using the exact same model as your singleplayer character and the customization is mostly limited to clothing (which still seems to allow for only minor variations of the general hoodie look all the games) and weapons, rather than changing the actual bodily appearance of the character and they'll probably be waved off as some other anonymous assasins without further relevance to the plot apart from their presence (rather like a protagonist in a Call of Duty game now that I think about it) while any given player will get the story told to them as though they were Arno (as opposed to all the other guys who just happen to look suspiciously similar to him).MarsAtlas said:
If the above turns out to be true, then I can certainly see why the development team would feel its efforts could be placed in better places than fleshing out something that won't actually affect the playing experience in anything but a very minor way.
Of course they can't say that because it would a) still give the message to the people who are furious now that the developer are too 'lazy' to create female characters and b) at least indirectly admit that the co-op might not have had had the same priority as other parts of the game, which will probably lead to even more people calling them lazy.
I guess some guy at the marketing department decided that at this point it would probably be best to limit it to the damage that has already been done rather than have anyone open their mouth and risk opening the next can of worms.
Completely ignoring the present argument and going back to the original conversation... really easily, actually.
Step one involves everyone pausing in sneering at each other. Gamers, among other things, want really good games to play. Social justice warriors want a world that stops shitting on people simply because they happen to not be cis heterosexual white dudes.
You know one of the ways to get really good games to play? Tackling interesting real-life issues and characters beyond Generic Grizzled White Marine Dude No. 1247. Taking real-life struggles into account. Realizing the depth of characterization you can get if you go beyond cookie-cutter hero types and accepting that our women characters in video games must be eye candy, our gay characters in video games must be jokes, our black characters in video games must be prime sidekick material ready to be killed for a cheap shot of 'emotional distress' even if we've been given no reason to care about any of the characters, et cetera, et cetera.
The most important part of that step one is realizing that both sides want to make the world better. Gamers want to very specifically make the world better by encouraging better games to play. Social Justice folk are also wanting to make the world better because they experience (or see their friends experience) all of this additional bullshit that doesn't even make sense being piled on top of them for arbitrary reasons.
Step two is putting this into practice. Recognize that yeah, there are some SJWs that go too far and get too mean, just like there are some on the other side who do the same thing (sup 4chan users who plan to save selfies posted on tumblr and photoshop them onto porn and spread them about the person's irl contacts for the express purpose of ruining their lives).
Come to the table not as adversaries but as allies. Stop asking "why are you so wrong", but "how can we work together". Listen to one another.
Realize there's going to be anger on both sides. For social justice folk especially. I'm just your run of the mill straight WASP gal, but when I see the kind of stuff some of my friends go through for being, for instance, asexual, it makes my blood boil. Who in their right mind thinks it appropriate to threaten to rape somebody to 'cure' their sexuality? Who in their right mind thinks it's okay to send death threats and cut off all ties with somebody simply because they're not interested in sex, for whatever reason? And that's the tip of the iceberg. Once you see what kind of things are going on to you, to your friends, it's really easy to get angry about it. Because it's worth getting angry about!
Imagine all that anger, and the feeling of noticing it every single day and being overwhelmed by it. That's why social justice people get so angry and sometimes get defensive and overboard. I know it might seem silly, but it's a case of sitting down and having a little empathy. Even if you don't understand every detail, take some deep breaths, and realize that people are hurting and being hurt.
I realize it's kinda difficult sometimes. But the two groups are actually natural allies. I mean, gamers want better games, and part of better games is making better characters. One of the many things social justice folk want is better characters in media to represent everybody fairly instead of just generic white dudes.
It just takes stepping back and not thinking of each other as adversaries, but as allies, and calmly and respectfully listening to one another.
...yeah I know that's pretty impossible, but hey, worth a try, right?
Step one involves everyone pausing in sneering at each other. Gamers, among other things, want really good games to play. Social justice warriors want a world that stops shitting on people simply because they happen to not be cis heterosexual white dudes.
You know one of the ways to get really good games to play? Tackling interesting real-life issues and characters beyond Generic Grizzled White Marine Dude No. 1247. Taking real-life struggles into account. Realizing the depth of characterization you can get if you go beyond cookie-cutter hero types and accepting that our women characters in video games must be eye candy, our gay characters in video games must be jokes, our black characters in video games must be prime sidekick material ready to be killed for a cheap shot of 'emotional distress' even if we've been given no reason to care about any of the characters, et cetera, et cetera.
The most important part of that step one is realizing that both sides want to make the world better. Gamers want to very specifically make the world better by encouraging better games to play. Social Justice folk are also wanting to make the world better because they experience (or see their friends experience) all of this additional bullshit that doesn't even make sense being piled on top of them for arbitrary reasons.
Step two is putting this into practice. Recognize that yeah, there are some SJWs that go too far and get too mean, just like there are some on the other side who do the same thing (sup 4chan users who plan to save selfies posted on tumblr and photoshop them onto porn and spread them about the person's irl contacts for the express purpose of ruining their lives).
Come to the table not as adversaries but as allies. Stop asking "why are you so wrong", but "how can we work together". Listen to one another.
Realize there's going to be anger on both sides. For social justice folk especially. I'm just your run of the mill straight WASP gal, but when I see the kind of stuff some of my friends go through for being, for instance, asexual, it makes my blood boil. Who in their right mind thinks it appropriate to threaten to rape somebody to 'cure' their sexuality? Who in their right mind thinks it's okay to send death threats and cut off all ties with somebody simply because they're not interested in sex, for whatever reason? And that's the tip of the iceberg. Once you see what kind of things are going on to you, to your friends, it's really easy to get angry about it. Because it's worth getting angry about!
Imagine all that anger, and the feeling of noticing it every single day and being overwhelmed by it. That's why social justice people get so angry and sometimes get defensive and overboard. I know it might seem silly, but it's a case of sitting down and having a little empathy. Even if you don't understand every detail, take some deep breaths, and realize that people are hurting and being hurt.
I realize it's kinda difficult sometimes. But the two groups are actually natural allies. I mean, gamers want better games, and part of better games is making better characters. One of the many things social justice folk want is better characters in media to represent everybody fairly instead of just generic white dudes.
It just takes stepping back and not thinking of each other as adversaries, but as allies, and calmly and respectfully listening to one another.
...yeah I know that's pretty impossible, but hey, worth a try, right?
So long as one group of extremely vocal people is trying to tell another what they can and can't do its not going to happen. There are some people who just genuinely would like to see more diversity but by and large its people hurling insults and accusations because x game doesn't represent x people. Or x games represents x people poorly. Or x game has committed whatever x social crime they decided exists now. Generally social shaming and brow beating has the effect of pissing people off. So I guess when Ubisoft doesn't have to apologize to people for not having female characters or when a game having scantily clad women stops being a crime against SJW humanity? I am more then happy to get along with anyone who doesn't try to dictate what other people are doing.
I am both a gamer (averages about 20 hours of gaming per week) and a "social justice warrior" (top political concern: all forms of equality) and I get along with myself just fine. There's such a simple thing as liking games for what they are, a great hobby for play pretend, and disliking games for what they don't do very well, such as being inclusive of minorities. Those of us arguing for better representation in games aren't out to take games away, we are trying to make games appealing to a larger set of people (and in some cases to drag games screaming out of the mindset of the 50's).
Damn broken quote button...
Vault101:
thats becuasr there are MORE movies and books ect and they are more diverse and even then the gender disparity is a big (and needless) problem in blockbusters
gaming is not that diverse (and yeah including the indies)
----
Oh, I totally agree that gaming is still growing and increased diversity should be encouraged whenever possible. My point is that when either side is so strictly enforcing it's own brand of "right" on what games absolutely "must" be, then that's not encouraging diversity at all.
Vault101:
thats becuasr there are MORE movies and books ect and they are more diverse and even then the gender disparity is a big (and needless) problem in blockbusters
gaming is not that diverse (and yeah including the indies)
----
Oh, I totally agree that gaming is still growing and increased diversity should be encouraged whenever possible. My point is that when either side is so strictly enforcing it's own brand of "right" on what games absolutely "must" be, then that's not encouraging diversity at all.