Serious question about inclusion in video games...

[Wraith]

For those that don't know, the Battletech gaming franchise had a new release for their video game section of this more than 3-decade successful run. Problem: One of their employees for the company handling the game came out as a tranny, and is a bit of very minor lolcow. A lot of people complained about getting a vidya with this warning sign. The guy turned faux chick is clearly mental to many, but it brought up the worry that the franchise was taking a nose dive down SJW avenue.

Now the game has been out, and except for, I think, one or two tranny characters in the game, one of which is optional, there isn't much I have seen that is worrisome. I have been waiting to play it because of comp specifications problems and the various SJW-possible issues swirling around the game.

My question: - Is it possible to have inclusion without proselytizing, forcing someone to actively participate as if they believed in an agenda, advocacy, or minimally activism or actively going for or against a side? And could this affect sales one way or anything since morals and beliefs have become so bitter on a level we haven't seen for a while?

It's not whether you would buy the product, it's a generic thought. I'm not sure it's possible. What do you think?

 

[OhGoy]

I don't completely understand the question. Are you asking if it's possible to have trans/gay/lesbian/traps/etc. in a game without making it political?

 

[Nekromantik]

If it's not in my face about it, I couldn't care less. It's like Samus being a chick, back in the day it was like Oh ok, lets get back to killing monsters. It the game starts going on about girldick and how hard it is to be asexual genderdemigrill robotnikin than I'm done. I can separate the art from the artist if the art is enjoyable, but I don't want to get preached to.

 

[Feline Darkmage]

I didn't know the Gamergate HQ subforum was still open...

Seriously though, inclusion isn't the bad thing, the bad thing is being a preachy dipshit like Sophie Labelle.

 

[Kroster]

Nobody's forcing you to play any game.

 

[Strange Looking Dog]

I mean if the whole company is a bunch of sjw chucklefucks than I'd consider boycott a reasonable option, but if it's just a couple of employees; no point letting that ruin the game for you.

 

[skiddlez]

I just want politics and "social activism" out of my hobbies and entertainment for fucks sake. Not everything has to be a god damn sociopolitical cause. It's entertainment. I want to play videogames, not have girlcock crammed down my throat, metaphorically speaking.

 

[ES 148]

ME3 had some gay people in it and it went about it well enough
ME:Andromeda went the other direction and that's where I stop

 

[Corrugated Daffodils]

Is the game good?
Yes: Then I don't give a shit who made it I'll give it a look and maybe buy it.
No: Then I don't give a shit and won't buy it.

I watch Roman polanski films my dude they're good. Who gives a shit who made the end product is. If it's good it's good.

 

[whatever I feel like]

If they pushed to have their agenda in the game, yes. If its just that the dev happened to be such and such, no.

 

[IV 445]

*shrug* I’ve been programmed, de-programmed, reprogrammed and had many system updates.

I’m just immune to being prodded into a certain viewpoint. A game can’t really affect me or offend my sensibilities anymore, what few I even have lol.

 

[Haramburger]

Nintendo games sometimes had you playing a genderless spaceship pilot, or a family(father/mother/child/dog), or a baby, or a demon. I didn't give a fuck unless the game was actually fun. Chances were, if the game had an outrageous concept nobody else was doing(like Demon's Crest) then it was probably going to be fun. And it was.

There's a finite amount of EFFORT you can put into making a video game, no matter who you are. If you waste all the EFFORT in making everything in the game align with some stupid political goal or idea, then you probably cut corners and didn't have enough EFFORT directed to making the game actually fun to play, which usually fucks your current and future sales.

Yes, you can make a game that is inclusive, but it should be an afterthought behind making the game actually enjoyable to play. Why does sexuality matter unless it's an actual eroge where the main character can actually have sex? This seems to be a thing with folks nowadays, there's so much fanfare surrounding games like BioWare's Dragon Age or Mass Effects where relationships kind of start, and you can end up with a fade-to-black, implied sex scene. Why bother? It's a lot of effort to blue-ball yourself, unless you're an immature child that can get off on kissing and cleavage alone.

 

[MrTroll]

Depends on if you can shoot them or not.

 

[Captain Toad]

If a game wants to be more inclusive, then it's no big deal. Having a gay character or whatever is all fine and dandy with me. In the end, the only thing that really matters is whether or not the game itself is any good.

What bugs me about this though is when people make a big deal out of this whole "need to be more inclusive". I don't understand why some people will get all overhyped about characters of a specific race/gender/sexuality being in video games. Being inclusive doesn't automatically make a game good. Why should it even matter?

 

[Y2K Baby]

Ethics in purchasing is fucking gay.

 

[Black Waltz]

if the game's good, then i don't give a fuck if the devs are all trannies. if they're making it to shove their political opinions down your throat, then I won't play it

 

[GarthMarenghisDankplace]

This only bothers me when it's done clumsily in a 'look how inclusive we're being way' especially cause that tends to be pure tokenism and actually more homo/trans/whatever phobic. But just the inclusion of an otherwise rounded character who happens to be gay/trans/female/person of colour doesn't bother me cause TBH if the only world a story writer can invent only includes angry straight white buff dudes then I'm not offended by it, but I reckon they're not that imaginative.

 

[BILLY MAYS]

Actually it's about ethics in including minorities.

 

[UW 411]

It really depends on whether the creators/devs project their own politics or belief system into their game, isolating a huge chunk of their purchasers or limiting the prospective player base to a few that share the same views.

When I get tired of SJWs and Trans-rage, I like to give

Spoiler: this

http://www.i-mockery.com/romhacks/abnormal-family/

nifty lil' ROM hack a playthrough. I should invite a dangerhair or two to play someday, might prove entertaining... Take a look if you haven't seen it (Battletoads/Double Dragon hack for the Sega Genesis, the texts and cutscenes are great!) It has 'people' of colour, dangerhair trannies and is all around offensive if you're a butthurt SJW.

Spoiler: NSFW(ish)

Basically, as long as it's a fun and playable game, I don't particularly care who made it. Like the Polanski argument or those who still find John K's art tutorials useful, as long as the creator isn't just shoehorning their odd beliefs into their work then it's cool.

 

[RG 448]

I’ll play the game if it’s good. If the devs’ political agenda doesn’t derail everything else, they can put as much of it in there as they want. I’m secure enough in my convictions to have them challenged.