Politics isn't the issue. Never was, or at the very least, not "politics" in the broader sense of the word. Good examples of games with political themes, messages and questions: Bioshock, Fallout: New Vegas, Dragon Age, Deus Ex, Metal Gear, Disco Elysium. I'm sure I could go on. I'm sure other people could add more to that list. The idea that an author, director or developer couldn't add a specific political message without ruining everything is also quite absurd. Essentially, this would be akin to self-censorship, where any and all critical thinking with regards to the political status quo, or the political in general, is tabboo. This type of mentality is cowardice in artistic form. The real issue lies in execution and the specific ideologies, along with the broader real world context in which these ideologies emerge. "Forced diversity" is bad because it often clashes with the very real fact that if a certain group of people only makes up 0.5% of the population, they shouldn't also be represented as being everywhere, all the time, all over history and in every setting. This is an internal contradiction. Forced diversity also comes from a cynical place, almost never from any artistic decision, but strictly from publishers and the like. It exists for brownie points and virtue signalling to possible advertisers and promotors who are desperate to not come across as "toxic", for fear of their product being buried underneath a storm of protest and cancel culture from chronically online tumblr feminists. It's born out of greed, not ideology specifically. A more artistic issue with it, is that if, say, a historically exploited group of people such as transgenders, gay people or even black people (within an american context, and more broadly within the context of capitalism-caused-ghetto-formation) is presented as being "perfectly normal, perfectly everywhere", this clashes with the very real social truth that these categories of people do not have their identity through neutral means. Their identity is marked by several layers of social structures, hierarchies, social norms and the breaking of these norms. That is to say, such groups and their identity are sensitive subject matters that require a delicate artistic touch, an intellectually honest mentality, and an eye for critical story-telling. It absolutely can NOT, for it's own sake, use a careless, edgelord, first world twitter mentality. Putting a black transgender gay asexual furry in Black Myth: Wukong, or several mixtures thereof, merely to please the circlejerk of virtue signallers and "journalists", would be akin to disrespecting the very subject matter these groups would invoke. It would, inevitably, be mocked by everybody. Not because most people are "x-phobic", but because everybody and their mother could see that this would contain several levels of parody, not serious subject matter. And that is the saddest thing of all: the groups that would have, under ideal circumstances, profited off of MORE representation in media, ultimately suffer the worst, as their ACTUAL, REAL struggles are now associated with the careless, witless, cynical touch of publishers, CEO's, diversity checklists and all other sorts of "behind-the-scenes" suits and their constant drive to exploit. The end result is that conservative, reactionary groups make ample use of this opportunity to continue attacking the groups themselves, or even the artists forced to make these types of stories, rather than the capitalist machinery behind it. And this type of propaganda WORKS. It works very well indeed. And that is my final message here. Progressives don't love woke. Progressives don't love forced diversity. Only conservatives do. They use it as ammunition. And companies use it as tools of exploitation. Both are working in tandem. Both profit off of this situation. No politics in games? That's pure idiocy, brought on by years of propaganda and a cowardly mindset. What I want is politics in games, with good execution. And if there is no good execution, then just drop the politics entirely and just focus on other things. Not every game needs to have a political message or moral. And not every game needs to be mindless fun WITHOUT these things. That is the balance we should strive towards. That is the ideal situation, whether for movies, shows or books and games. REAL diversity of tastes, not the forced dogma of simple-minded anti-artistry screaming zealots.
Politics isn't the issue. Never was, or at the very least, not "politics" in the broader sense of the word.
Good examples of games with political themes, messages and questions: Bioshock, Fallout: New Vegas, Dragon Age, Deus Ex, Metal Gear, Disco Elysium. I'm sure I could go on. I'm sure other people could add more to that list.
The idea that an author, director or developer couldn't add a specific political message without ruining everything is also quite absurd. Essentially, this would be akin to self-censorship, where any and all critical thinking with regards to the political status quo, or the political in general, is tabboo. This type of mentality is cowardice in artistic form.
The real issue lies in execution and the specific ideologies, along with the broader real world context in which these ideologies emerge.
"Forced diversity" is bad because it often clashes with the very real fact that if a certain group of people only makes up 0.5% of the population, they shouldn't also be represented as being everywhere, all the time, all over history and in every setting. This is an internal contradiction.
Forced diversity also comes from a cynical place, almost never from any artistic decision, but strictly from publishers and the like. It exists for brownie points and virtue signalling to possible advertisers and promotors who are desperate to not come across as "toxic", for fear of their product being buried underneath a storm of protest and cancel culture from chronically online tumblr feminists. It's born out of greed, not ideology specifically.
A more artistic issue with it, is that if, say, a historically exploited group of people such as transgenders, gay people or even black people (within an american context, and more broadly within the context of capitalism-caused-ghetto-formation) is presented as being "perfectly normal, perfectly everywhere", this clashes with the very real social truth that these categories of people do not have their identity through neutral means. Their identity is marked by several layers of social structures, hierarchies, social norms and the breaking of these norms.
That is to say, such groups and their identity are sensitive subject matters that require a delicate artistic touch, an intellectually honest mentality, and an eye for critical story-telling. It absolutely can NOT, for it's own sake, use a careless, edgelord, first world twitter mentality.
Putting a black transgender gay asexual furry in Black Myth: Wukong, or several mixtures thereof, merely to please the circlejerk of virtue signallers and "journalists", would be akin to disrespecting the very subject matter these groups would invoke. It would, inevitably, be mocked by everybody. Not because most people are "x-phobic", but because everybody and their mother could see that this would contain several levels of parody, not serious subject matter.
And that is the saddest thing of all: the groups that would have, under ideal circumstances, profited off of MORE representation in media, ultimately suffer the worst, as their ACTUAL, REAL struggles are now associated with the careless, witless, cynical touch of publishers, CEO's, diversity checklists and all other sorts of "behind-the-scenes" suits and their constant drive to exploit. The end result is that conservative, reactionary groups make ample use of this opportunity to continue attacking the groups themselves, or even the artists forced to make these types of stories, rather than the capitalist machinery behind it. And this type of propaganda WORKS. It works very well indeed.
And that is my final message here. Progressives don't love woke. Progressives don't love forced diversity. Only conservatives do. They use it as ammunition. And companies use it as tools of exploitation. Both are working in tandem. Both profit off of this situation.
No politics in games? That's pure idiocy, brought on by years of propaganda and a cowardly mindset. What I want is politics in games, with good execution. And if there is no good execution, then just drop the politics entirely and just focus on other things.
Not every game needs to have a political message or moral. And not every game needs to be mindless fun WITHOUT these things. That is the balance we should strive towards. That is the ideal situation, whether for movies, shows or books and games. REAL diversity of tastes, not the forced dogma of simple-minded anti-artistry screaming zealots.