My biggest issue with the gender binary in The Outer Worlds:

[Obsidian_Lover_69]

When making a character, especially when hitting randomize, there is a complete disconnect between sex and gender identifiers. You can make a woman with a full beard and jawline, you can make a man with a soft face and bone structure, you can make someone androgynous or non binary.

Yet, there is not a single NPC that breaks the gender boundary in the whole game. Everyone looks and presents like typical men and women. It would make sense that in the future the lines of gender are blurred, so its strange that only you do so.

Anyway, have a nice day, thanks for listenin'.

[Force58]

On 11/27/2019 at 6:28 PM, Obsidian_Lover_69 said:

When making a character, especially when hitting randomize, there is a complete disconnect between sex and gender identifiers. You can make a woman with a full beard and jawline, you can make a man with a soft face and bone structure, you can make someone androgynous or non binary.

Yet, there is not a single NPC that breaks the gender boundary in the whole game. Everyone looks and presents like typical men and women. It would make sense that in the future the lines of gender are blurred, so its strange that only you do so.

Anyway, have a nice day, thanks for listenin'.

Hi there.  I read your post a couple times to ensure I understood what you're saying.  I think I may be missing your point though.  Are you saying that when randomizing a character there are no clear male or female or other specific characteristics to apply?  I'm pretty sure when I made my character I selected "male" and went from there.  I think what you're asking though is specifically about NPC's and that they don't present as anything other than male or female.  Are you deducing this based on their speech?  It would be pretty hard to do based just on physical appearance though, right?

[Ommamar]

Well what I got from the OP is that even though you can choose a male but still get some very feminine appearance and vise versus for females.  You don't see things such as female NPC's having beards or male NPCs having the Farrah Faucet hairdo even though it is an option when you make your character.

[Jill7894]

I mean... judging by a lot of the gaming culture nowadays, I couldn't imagine the flack Obsidian would get if a fifth of the female characters in the game had beards. Just saying.

[Wormerine]

I mean randomize means randomize. Yes, if you randomize your character, it will be randomized. I don't know how else to explain it. 

[algroth]

I may be wrong, but I think the OP's point is that despite having the game accomodate non-binary or more androgynous options in terms of appearance, there's no character that really blurs the binary configuration of gender roles/identity and so on. I wouldn't mind a bit more representation in that regard though I'm also usually wary of representation for representation's sake, for what it can say or fail to say in a certain context and so on (e.g. I think a setting where trans people are just like anyone else and treated in the same fashion, you run the risk of belittling or ignoring the very real discrimination and segregation they suffer in the real world, and with it ignore several anxieties that are produced as a fear of responses and repercussions caused by the same and so on). It also ignores that the absence of a minority in a culture or sphere or other can speak volumes of that sphere: maybe in the Outer Worlds setting, the reason why gender identity is binary is also because it's convenient to the corporations: it's already stated that newborns are born into the "family" of a corporation and are made corporation property - if so it makes sense that in this setting an affair that couldn't produce an offspring would be counter-productive and a waste of time that'd be better spent working instead - if so, a non-binary understanding of sex or gender could be suppressed by merely being non-productive and so on (i.e. romance, gender and relationship as far as the Board is concerned is only relevant insofar as it produces a new generation of workers). Just throwing out ideas, of course, bit still.

Edited November 30, 2019 by algroth

[Astalph]

On 11/27/2019 at 6:28 PM, Obsidian_Lover_69 said:

When making a character, especially when hitting randomize, there is a complete disconnect between sex and gender identifiers. You can make a woman with a full beard and jawline, you can make a man with a soft face and bone structure, you can make someone androgynous or non binary.

Yet, there is not a single NPC that breaks the gender boundary in the whole game. Everyone looks and presents like typical men and women. It would make sense that in the future the lines of gender are blurred, so its strange that only you do so.

Anyway, have a nice day, thanks for listenin'.

That makes perfect sense to me. How many women with beards do you see in real life? And how do you know some of the "female" characters you see in-game are not trans? If they were men,identifying as women, then you would never know. There's nothing strange about the NPCs in the game. YOU are the one that is strange. I'm sick and tired of ridiculous people like you trying to force your "unusual" world view on the rest of us. Yes, I said "unusual". And if you're offended by that, then you are,indeed, a ridiculous person. Because there's nothing "usual" about expecting to see women with beards while going throughout your day. You are definitely just going out of your way to find something to complain about. If there were characters in the game that were trans,how would you know unless they came out and told you. Why can't you just imagine that some of the female characters in the game are actually men "identifying" as women, and vice versa? Why can't you just play a video game without having to force sexuality all over it.  Just because P.C. obsessed countries like the US have decided to stop listing things like "Gender Dysphoria" as a mental illness does not mean that the rest of us agree that your world view is anywhere near the norm. It is not the norm. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being trans,etc. But there is something wrong with forcing your sexuality into places it does not belong. Such as a video game. You don't see heterosexuals complaining that none of the characters in-game explicitly state in their dialogue that they are heterosexual. If you want there to be trans-sexual,asexual,bi-sexual, or whatever form of "sexual" floats your boat, you can just roleplay it in your own head. Because you can't tell someone's orientation just by looking at them. Stop being so ridiculous.

[Astalph]

On 11/30/2019 at 1:00 PM, algroth said:

I may be wrong, but I think the OP's point is that despite having the game accomodate non-binary or more androgynous options in terms of appearance, there's no character that really blurs the binary configuration of gender roles/identity and so on. I wouldn't mind a bit more representation in that regard though I'm also usually wary of representation for representation's sake, for what it can say or fail to say in a certain context and so on (e.g. I think a setting where trans people are just like anyone else and treated in the same fashion, you run the risk of belittling or ignoring the very real discrimination and segregation they suffer in the real world, and with it ignore several anxieties that are produced as a fear of responses and repercussions caused by the same and so on). It also ignores that the absence of a minority in a culture or sphere or other can speak volumes of that sphere: maybe in the Outer Worlds setting, the reason why gender identity is binary is also because it's convenient to the corporations: it's already stated that newborns are born into the "family" of a corporation and are made corporation property - if so it makes sense that in this setting an affair that couldn't produce an offspring would be counter-productive and a waste of time that'd be better spent working instead - if so, a non-binary understanding of sex or gender could be suppressed by merely being non-productive and so on (i.e. romance, gender and relationship as far as the Board is concerned is only relevant insofar as it produces a new generation of workers). Just throwing out ideas, of course, bit still.

Why does sexuality have to be forced onto video games? So what if there's no characters in the game that "blur the lines"? There aren't a lot of NPCs in the game. People that "blur the lines" in real life are not standing on every street. In fact,unless you live in a big city that has areas or communities where these people "hang out", for lack of a better term, you'd be hard pressed to see these "gender-blurring", people. And if you live in the country like I do, you would probably never see such a person. Forcing sexuality upon a game like this makes no sense, and is completely unnecessary. What about wheel-chair bound people? Or people with prosthetic limbs? Or blind people walking down the street using a walking stick, or an assistance dog? Complaining that you don't see "gender bending" people in a video game is actually very selfish. There are many,many demographics that are not represented in the game. Such as the ones I mentioned. And there are far more people walking around with prosthetic limbs in the world, than there are "cross-dressers", or "gender-benders", or those that "blur the lines" as you called it.  This is a sci-fy game. It's not a a game based on sexuality. This is ridiculous....

[algroth]

3 hours ago, Astalph said:

Why does sexuality have to be forced onto video games? So what if there's no characters in the game that "blur the lines"? There aren't a lot of NPCs in the game. People that "blur the lines" in real life are not standing on every street. In fact,unless you live in a big city that has areas or communities where these people "hang out", for lack of a better term, you'd be hard pressed to see these "gender-blurring", people. And if you live in the country like I do, you would probably never see such a person. Forcing sexuality upon a game like this makes no sense, and is completely unnecessary. What about wheel-chair bound people? Or people with prosthetic limbs? Or blind people walking down the street using a walking stick, or an assistance dog? Complaining that you don't see "gender bending" people in a video game is actually very selfish. There are many,many demographics that are not represented in the game. Such as the ones I mentioned. And there are far more people walking around with prosthetic limbs in the world, than there are "cross-dressers", or "gender-benders", or those that "blur the lines" as you called it.  This is a sci-fy game. It's not a a game based on sexuality. This is ridiculous....

Representation does not imply being "based on" said matter. A sci-fi game can still absolutely include non-binary people, especially one with these many characters (yes, there are lots of NPCs in the game), without being strictly about gender politics or any less a sci-fi. It's sort of what science fiction as a genre does: touch on social, political and existential issues through the lens of technology, science, speculative futures and the likes. This itself is a pretty big talking point in the current socio-political landscape, so it'd make sense to touch on it.

Secondly, no one is "forcing" anything onto video games. No one spoke of non-binary inclusion as a demand here, and rather as a speculation on their inclusion or how they'd fit into the setting - heck, I've made the argument that their complete *absence* could make sense given how relationships and gender are shown in the setting to exist only because it's a means to ensure a new generation of workers for the Board, and not because the Board cares about human relationship or identity per se. If anything the only one here who seems to be wanting to force something *out of* video games is yourself, with this post of yours. The only one being "selfish" here, demanding the exclusion of a very real demographic in society, is yourself.

Lastly, you're going about your demands the wrong way. "What about wheel-chair bound people? Or people with prosthetic limbs? Or blind people walking down the street using a walking stick, or an assistance dog?" Yeah, why *don't* we see more disabled people in games? Talking about the potential inclusion of one minority doesn't preclude the potential inclusion of another - I certainly wouldn't mind seeing the presence of people who are impaired in any way, especially in a setting that makes pretty constant references to worker accidents and misshaps, and where such accidents and failures in workplace safety are placed on the worker opposite to the company. A side-quest dealing with such a scenario would have been very fitting to the game's setting and very interesting as well. Your argument is similar to the sort people who work 60 hours a week on minimum wage use to discredit the very real complaints people who earn more or work less than they do have regarding work times and salary - the question shouldn't be "why should they ask for better working conditions?", or in this case "why should they get representation?", and rather "why aren't we asking for the same?".

Edited December 3, 2019 by algroth

[daven]

Women with beards are being oppressed by the patriarchy!!!

Let's dye our hair pink and start a protest. 

[Force58]

7 hours ago, Astalph said:

That makes perfect sense to me. How many women with beards do you see in real life? And how do you know some of the "female" characters you see in-game are not trans? If they were men,identifying as women, then you would never know. There's nothing strange about the NPCs in the game. YOU are the one that is strange. I'm sick and tired of ridiculous people like you trying to force your "unusual" world view on the rest of us. Yes, I said "unusual". And if you're offended by that, then you are,indeed, a ridiculous person. Because there's nothing "usual" about expecting to see women with beards while going throughout your day. You are definitely just going out of your way to find something to complain about. If there were characters in the game that were trans,how would you know unless they came out and told you. Why can't you just imagine that some of the female characters in the game are actually men "identifying" as women, and vice versa? Why can't you just play a video game without having to force sexuality all over it.  Just because P.C. obsessed countries like the US have decided to stop listing things like "Gender Dysphoria" as a mental illness does not mean that the rest of us agree that your world view is anywhere near the norm. It is not the norm. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with being trans,etc. But there is something wrong with forcing your sexuality into places it does not belong. Such as a video game. You don't see heterosexuals complaining that none of the characters in-game explicitly state in their dialogue that they are heterosexual. If you want there to be trans-sexual,asexual,bi-sexual, or whatever form of "sexual" floats your boat, you can just roleplay it in your own head. Because you can't tell someone's orientation just by looking at them. Stop being so ridiculous.

It's why I had serious 2nd thoughts about NOT playing Borderlands 3, with all the nonsense over FL4K's character and whether it was a he, she, it or whatever.  It made matters worse when Gearbox came out and officially said that FL4K was a non-gender character so that the non-gender players would stop their media revolt.  You should have seen the posts on that forum!  It is sad now-a-days that we can't even play a video game and not be assaulted by this bull.  I don't know if OP was simply trying to stir stuff up or had a legit concern, who knows, but it really shouldn't be a topic for discussion in this forum in the first place.

[Force58]

3 hours ago, algroth said:

Representation does not imply being "based on" said matter. A sci-fi game can still absolutely include non-binary people, especially one with these many characters (yes, there are lots of NPCs in the game), without being strictly about gender politics or any less a sci-fi. It's sort of what science fiction as a genre does: touch on social, political and existential issues through the lens of technology, science, speculative futures and the likes. This itself is a pretty big talking point in the current socio-political landscape, so it'd make sense to touch on it.

Secondly, no one is "forcing" anything onto video games. No one spoke of non-binary inclusion as a demand here, and rather as a speculation on their inclusion or how they'd fit into the setting - heck, I've made the argument that their complete *absence* could make sense given how relationships and gender are shown in the setting to exist only because it's a means to ensure a new generation of workers for the Board, and not because the Board cares about human relationship or identity per se. If anything the only one here who seems to be wanting to force something *out of* video games is yourself, with this post of yours. The only one being "selfish" here, demanding the exclusion of a very real demographic in society, is yourself.

Lastly, you're going about your demands the wrong way. "What about wheel-chair bound people? Or people with prosthetic limbs? Or blind people walking down the street using a walking stick, or an assistance dog?" Yeah, why *don't* we see more disabled people in games? Talking about the potential inclusion of one minority doesn't preclude the potential inclusion of another - I certainly wouldn't mind seeing the presence of people who are impaired in any way, especially in a setting that makes pretty constant references to worker accidents and misshaps, and where such accidents and failures in workplace safety are placed on the worker opposite to the company. A side-quest dealing with such a scenario would have been very fitting to the game's setting and very interesting as well. Your argument is similar to the sort people who work 60 hours a week on minimum wage use to discredit the very real complaints people who earn more or work less than they do have regarding work times and salary - the question shouldn't be "why should they ask for better working conditions?", or in this case "why should they get representation?", and rather "why aren't we asking for the same?".

Real life is one thing.  People are getting tired of this stuff being included in video games, something people do to escape the real world.  Social media has made it a thing and it's a "hot topic" in the forums that discuss said games as well, so there's really no getting away from it.  I think a lot of people go along with it for fear of being called out.  It's one thing to address these issues, but I for one would like to see them not come up or be incorporated into video games I play.  There's absolutely no reason to include every single demographic into a video game and the fact that game companies and some people that play them do is kind of scary.  Just make games that are fun and fun to play, keep politics and this stuff out of them.

[Gorgon]

It's a joke, the bearded ladies are a western period joke. Notice how extreme all the 'random'  generated results are.  They aren't random, someone made them for ****s and giggles. 

If you are angry simply with the fact that you can give yourself a bead and a female face. Well, I mean, get over yourself ?

There aren't always SWJs hiding around every corner. 

 

 

[uuuhhii]

2 minutes ago, Gorgon said:

It's a joke, the bearded ladies are a western period joke. Notice how extreme all the 'random'  generated results are.  They aren't random, someone made them for ****s and giggles. 

If you are angry simply with the fact that you can give yourself a bead and a female face. Well, I mean, get over yourself ?

There aren't always SWJs hiding around every corner. 

 

 

never understand why would character creation doesn't allow everyone choose beard

character creation often include makeup

so why not beard?

[algroth]

2 hours ago, Force58 said:

Real life is one thing.  People are getting tired of this stuff being included in video games, something people do to escape the real world.  Social media has made it a thing and it's a "hot topic" in the forums that discuss said games as well, so there's really no getting away from it.  I think a lot of people go along with it for fear of being called out.  It's one thing to address these issues, but I for one would like to see them not come up or be incorporated into video games I play.  There's absolutely no reason to include every single demographic into a video game and the fact that game companies and some people that play them do is kind of scary.  Just make games that are fun and fun to play, keep politics and this stuff out of them.

It'd be better to not assume how everyone plays video games or engages with them. Some are fine with sheer escapism, others enjoy games because they're a valid narrative artform and have interesting things to tell. It's the reason why people love games or films that "make them think". It's certainly why I engage with Obsidian's work on a much deeper level than I do many that of many other companies out there.

What's more, let's stop the hypocrisy for a moment here. The matter of "politics" in games, and of "people play games to escape the real world", are topics that are only ever brought up in regards to discussions about gender and minority inclusion. I've *never* seen anyone criticize a game like This War of Mine or Innocence: A Plague Tale in these terms, even though they sink their feet deep into the mire of regular civilian life in horrible historical times. I've never heard a Call of Duty player complain about the constant depiction of war crimes, acts of terrorism and modern warfare as "not being escapist" when they go to such painstaking ends to capture those events as realistically and with as much meticulous detail as possible (I've certainly heard *other* complaints about them, like trying to pass off US war crimes as Russian acts, but I digress). And I sure as Hell don't see people complaining about The Outer Worlds bombarding one with anti-capitalist corporate satire at every turn, or that the game doesn't shy away from a late-stage capitalist society in decline and literal starvation and the likes, where you have discussions on various political systems, unionization and more. If you think this isn't political, look closer. No, we bring up the matter that games "offer an escape from the real world" only when someone brings up the matter of LGBT inclusion. It's a front, it's an excuse used to mask the rather blatant and heavily documented bigotry and intolerance towards LGBT groups rampant across the gamer community.

And again I have to stress: I'm wary of representation for representation's sake. I certainly don't think the response is to include for the sake of including. But just because we shouldn't do that doesn't mean it's not a topic worth considering, or a topic we should discourage from being represented in games. The same we don't discourage hundreds of other political and social themes often depicted in the medium.

Edited December 3, 2019 by algroth

[algroth]

In other words...

[Hawke64]

I agree with the OP.

From in-universe perspective, employees are assets, assets' gender is irrelevant as long as they perform their function. Thus NBs should be able to change their legal and social gender, because it would be just one record in a database, nothing more. Though, it would not work with trans*people, because if "medical treatment is a privilege, not a right" and HRT and surgeries are not cheap (just like IRL), it would mean that low-level employees are unable to afford them (and can eventually succumb to depression), high-level employees can get through transition fast and issue-free enough to not consider "trans" as an identity.
From out-of-universe perspective (technical), as gender identity =/= gender expression, just adding the pronoun "they" would be sufficient. There are not many instances, where the avatar's gender is mentioned. For NPCs it's pretty much the same. There was one NB character in an Obsidian game (DLC) and the player could not misgender them anyhow (could murder, but for unrelated  reasons), so it is definitely possible to implement. And the protagonist of the Saints Row series could count as a good example, though "good" as "fun to play as", not "close to actual experience of the social group".

[Force58]

17 hours ago, Hawke64 said:

I agree with the OP.

From in-universe perspective, employees are assets, assets' gender is irrelevant as long as they perform their function. Thus NBs should be able to change their legal and social gender, because it would be just one record in a database, nothing more. Though, it would not work with trans*people, because if "medical treatment is a privilege, not a right" and HRT and surgeries are not cheap (just like IRL), it would mean that low-level employees are unable to afford them (and can eventually succumb to depression), high-level employees can get through transition fast and issue-free enough to not consider "trans" as an identity.
From out-of-universe perspective (technical), as gender identity =/= gender expression, just adding the pronoun "they" would be sufficient. There are not many instances, where the avatar's gender is mentioned. For NPCs it's pretty much the same. There was one NB character in an Obsidian game (DLC) and the player could not misgender them anyhow (could murder, but for unrelated  reasons), so it is definitely possible to implement. And the protagonist of the Saints Row series could count as a good example, though "good" as "fun to play as", not "close to actual experience of the social group".

I'm gunna need a translator to sort this out.

[Force58]

23 hours ago, algroth said:

In other words...

Exactly!!!

[Force58]

23 hours ago, algroth said:

It'd be better to not assume how everyone plays video games or engages with them. Some are fine with sheer escapism, others enjoy games because they're a valid narrative artform and have interesting things to tell. It's the reason why people love games or films that "make them think". It's certainly why I engage with Obsidian's work on a much deeper level than I do many that of many other companies out there.

What's more, let's stop the hypocrisy for a moment here. The matter of "politics" in games, and of "people play games to escape the real world", are topics that are only ever brought up in regards to discussions about gender and minority inclusion. I've *never* seen anyone criticize a game like This War of Mine or Innocence: A Plague Tale in these terms, even though they sink their feet deep into the mire of regular civilian life in horrible historical times. I've never heard a Call of Duty player complain about the constant depiction of war crimes, acts of terrorism and modern warfare as "not being escapist" when they go to such painstaking ends to capture those events as realistically and with as much meticulous detail as possible (I've certainly heard *other* complaints about them, like trying to pass off US war crimes as Russian acts, but I digress). And I sure as Hell don't see people complaining about The Outer Worlds bombarding one with anti-capitalist corporate satire at every turn, or that the game doesn't shy away from a late-stage capitalist society in decline and literal starvation and the likes, where you have discussions on various political systems, unionization and more. If you think this isn't political, look closer. No, we bring up the matter that games "offer an escape from the real world" only when someone brings up the matter of LGBT inclusion. It's a front, it's an excuse used to mask the rather blatant and heavily documented bigotry and intolerance towards LGBT groups rampant across the gamer community.

And again I have to stress: I'm wary of representation for representation's sake. I certainly don't think the response is to include for the sake of including. But just because we shouldn't do that doesn't mean it's not a topic worth considering, or a topic we should discourage from being represented in games. The same we don't discourage hundreds of other political and social themes often depicted in the medium.

I get it, but I didn't say it's how "everyone" plays video games as everyone has their own reasons, like you mentioned.

And yes, I realize there are both politics and social themes being included in video games, more so than ever.  My personal opinion is that it is too much right now, that's all.

I noticed that right away while playing The Outer Worlds and was initially put off.  But as I got into it as I saw it was just regular folks "sticking it to the corporate giants", and I'm ok with that.

What wasn't cool for me was what almost happened to the latest COD, all the outrage over realism and the calls to have the game content changed or removed.  Thankfully the devs did not change the game or cave in to the craziness.

Then we have Borderlands 3.  I'm a regular on the Gearbox forum and came across a thread talking about the playable character FL4K, not sure if you're aware of the topic or not but there's plenty out there to see.  This was prior to the game being released and all the trailers depicted FL4K as being masculine due to it's voice.  I questioned people on the forum about why they were so upset with people using the "wrong" pronoun to describe it, there were many others doing the same.  Some of the respondents were genuinely upset that people couldn't understand why using "him" and "her", etc., incorrectly would sometimes cause pain and anxiety for them.  I spoke with several people who felt this way and came to understand where they were coming from and was careful from that point on about being sensitive wrt the gender topic. 

I do see your point and realize now that I probably shouldn't have questioned OP about wanting a better, less restrictive randomizer for character creation.  Once I remembered the discussions had about FL4K it all came back that we live in a different time now and have to be conscious of everyone else

[algroth]

1 hour ago, Force58 said:

What wasn't cool for me was what almost happened to the latest COD, all the outrage over realism and the calls to have the game content changed or removed.  Thankfully the devs did not change the game or cave in to the craziness.

The only craziness regarding COD is that they *didn't* change it. There's no acceptable argument whatsoever towards portraying American war crimes as Russian ones instead. That isn't escapism, that isn't "not being political". On the contrary, it's deeply political, and worst of all, it's outright propagandist and manipulative - you are literally blaming real events on other people to deflect the shameful parts of your history towards other people and countries, all in a game played by kids who aren't aware of these historical episodes and who largely lack the capacity to scrutinize what they're being shown. But then again, this is the same company whose idea of "not taking a political stance" involves banning a professional player from their tournament for a whole year after defending basic human rights and firing the casters because of merely being on the stream the same time the player was when he said it - because they wouldn't want to upset the nation responsible out of fear of being censored.

2 hours ago, Force58 said:

I noticed that right away while playing The Outer Worlds and was initially put off.  But as I got into it as I saw it was just regular folks "sticking it to the corporate giants", and I'm ok with that.

I don't do this often, but you really didn't get it. I suggest playing closer attention.

2 hours ago, Force58 said:

Exactly!!!

Again, I suspect you didn't get this either.

I repeat, the only reason why politics are "too much right now" is really because the "politics" in question threaten the "safe space" video games are perceived to be by the anti-LGBT crowd. It's extremely telling that of all the Tom Clancy games and military shooters and depictions of turbulent historical times and mental illnesses and whatnot, the only time this comes up is when gender fits into the equation. Another case in point:

Again, let's cut the hypocrisy here.

[Force58]

20 hours ago, algroth said:

The only craziness regarding COD is that they *didn't* change it. There's no acceptable argument whatsoever towards portraying American war crimes as Russian ones instead. That isn't escapism, that isn't "not being political". On the contrary, it's deeply political, and worst of all, it's outright propagandist and manipulative - you are literally blaming real events on other people to deflect the shameful parts of your history towards other people and countries, all in a game played by kids who aren't aware of these historical episodes and who largely lack the capacity to scrutinize what they're being shown. But then again, this is the same company whose idea of "not taking a political stance" involves banning a professional player from their tournament for a whole year after defending basic human rights and firing the casters because of merely being on the stream the same time the player was when he said it - because they wouldn't want to upset the nation responsible out of fear of being censored.

I don't do this often, but you really didn't get it. I suggest playing closer attention.

Again, I suspect you didn't get this either.

I repeat, the only reason why politics are "too much right now" is really because the "politics" in question threaten the "safe space" video games are perceived to be by the anti-LGBT crowd. It's extremely telling that of all the Tom Clancy games and military shooters and depictions of turbulent historical times and mental illnesses and whatnot, the only time this comes up is when gender fits into the equation. Another case in point:

Again, let's cut the hypocrisy here.

 

I tried, oh well.

And for the record, the latest COD is about a fictional location and not depicting anything real that has happened.  You can certainly see similarities to certain events from the past but the devs even said that wasn't their intent to make us think they're trying to recreate X, just to create a more realistic representation in the life of  military operatives.  The COD series has been getting more and more realistic every year its come out.  The game also has a mature rating and should not be played by "kids", that was also stressed by the devs on many occasions.   I get it, "kids" will find a way to play games, but that doesn't mean game companies have to assume so and not provide the content others want to play.

I "get" exactly what you're talking about and sorry that doesn't come across in my post.

[daven]

21 hours ago, algroth said:

The only craziness regarding COD is that they *didn't* change it. There's no acceptable argument whatsoever towards portraying American war crimes as Russian ones instead. That isn't escapism, that isn't "not being political". On the contrary, it's deeply political, and worst of all, it's outright propagandist and manipulative - you are literally blaming real events on other people to deflect the shameful parts of your history towards other people and countries, all in a game played by kids who aren't aware of these historical episodes and who largely lack the capacity to scrutinize what they're being shown. But then again, this is the same company whose idea of "not taking a political stance" involves banning a professional player from their tournament for a whole year after defending basic human rights and firing the casters because of merely being on the stream the same time the player was when he said it - because they wouldn't want to upset the nation responsible out of fear of being censored.

I don't do this often, but you really didn't get it. I suggest playing closer attention.

Again, I suspect you didn't get this either.

I repeat, the only reason why politics are "too much right now" is really because the "politics" in question threaten the "safe space" video games are perceived to be by the anti-LGBT crowd. It's extremely telling that of all the Tom Clancy games and military shooters and depictions of turbulent historical times and mental illnesses and whatnot, the only time this comes up is when gender fits into the equation. Another case in point:

Again, let's cut the hypocrisy here.

Americans have been doing this for WW2 movies for years, making out they were the only ones who did anything in that war. Completely forgetting all the efforts British and the rest of the allies had been doing for years. 

Then young people believe the rubbish they see in films and get a completely incorrect and distorted view of the world.

[Blodhemn]

I like how it's already decided gender eventually is consolidated as if it's the linear progression. A hypothesis about as grounded as flying cars.

[waltc]

On 12/3/2019 at 10:42 AM, Gorgon said:

It's a joke, the bearded ladies are a western period joke. Notice how extreme all the 'random'  generated results are.  They aren't random, someone made them for ****s and giggles. 

If you are angry simply with the fact that you can give yourself a bead and a female face. Well, I mean, get over yourself ?

There aren't always SWJs hiding around every corner. 

 

 

I go along with this...;)  Younger folks have got to work on developing more of a sense of humor these days--they miss so much by taking every little thing seriously or out of context.  I mean, some people may like playing with "the bearded lady" from the circus--who knows, and who cares?  It's isn't as if the developers are trying to make some kind of social statement as there isn't one to make--99.9999% of all females happen to actually like being female, believe it or not....;) (Or so my wife informs me!)  Ditto males, for the most part.  I never noticed it, actually...;)