I don't like it but I'll tolerate it if the game is fun. That's why I play games after all: to have fun... not expand or correct my worldview according to the developer's fancy.
Check this out, though: Expanding your worldview can be fun.
That'a assuming that the player isn't doing that themselves somehow outside of playing games, and it's also assuming that the developer's worldview is the correct one and worth learning about. No thank you.
Check this out, though: Expanding your worldview can be fun.
That'a assuming that the player isn't doing that themselves somehow outside of playing games, and it's also assuming that the developer's worldview is the correct one and worth learning about. No thank you.
Well, no one's viewpoint will ever be "correct" in that context as there is no such thing. Learning something different though has always been worthwhile to me. In games or in real life, learning and growing is learning and growing.
Check this out, though: Expanding your worldview can be fun.
That'a assuming that the player isn't doing that themselves somehow outside of playing games, and it's also assuming that the developer's worldview is the correct one and worth learning about. No thank you.
Well, no one's viewpoint will ever be "correct" in that context as there is no such thing. Learning something different though has always been worthwhile to me. In games or in real life, learning and growing is learning and growing.
No one's viewpoint is going to be correct, that's accurate and that reinforces my point.
Once again, you're assuming that the developer is going to bring some new worldview to the table. Social justice exists outside games and has a wide variety of topics covering almost everything. Extremely doubtful that I'm going to learn something new about social justice from a video game, lol.
Funny how everyone going "expanding your worldview is cool" seem to forget that it can also go: "hm, I believe in equality of men and women, of hetero and homosexuals, of people of all skin colors... but let's expand my worldview by reading Mein Kampf!" . 'tis just a jest remark, but still.
Funny how everyone going "expanding your worldview is cool" seem to forget that it can also go: "hm, I believe in equality of men and women, of hetero and homosexuals, of people of all skin colors... but let's expand my worldview by reading Mein Kampf!" . 'tis just a jest remark, but still.
I have not forgotten that point at all. As I said, learning and growing is important. We humans frequently learn what not to do by examples and mistakes as well.
Check this out, though: Expanding your worldview can be fun.
That'a assuming that the player isn't doing that themselves somehow outside of playing games, and it's also assuming that the developer's worldview is the correct one and worth learning about. No thank you.
Well, no one's viewpoint will ever be "correct" in that context as there is no such thing. Learning something different though has always been worthwhile to me. In games or in real life, learning and growing is learning and growing.
No one's viewpoint is going to be correct, that's accurate and that reinforces my point.
Once again, you're assuming that the developer is going to bring some new worldview to the table. Social justice exists outside games and has a wide variety of topics covering almost everything. Extremely doubtful that I'm going to learn something new about social justice from a video game, lol.
Sorry, I don't see how that reinforces your point at all. You seem to be assuming that other viewpoints are less correct than your own or not correct in any way and therefore not worthwhile. I believe that seeing another viewpoint and understanding it will only help in personal learning and development. The fact that it is different can help to a fuller and more complete understanding of the entire topic since no one person knows everything about any given topic.
The fact that you're condoning something called social justice warfare is telling.
You know some people have different views than you and that's ok, right? Developers are more than welcome to try to influence the player's opinion on certain subjects, but forcing it down someone's throat is not progressive - it's regressive. Like I voted, I'm fine with it if it's not preachy. Having a gay or trans character in your game is fine, who cares, but I don't enjoy being told what's right and wrong and how to think. I don't think many people do.
The fact that you're condoning something called social justice warfare is telling.
You know some people have different views than you and that's ok, right? Developers are more than welcome to try to influence the player's opinion on certain subjects, but forcing it down someone's throat is not progressive - it's regressive. Like I voted, I'm fine with it if it's not preachy. Having a gay or trans character in your game is fine, who cares, but I don't enjoy being told what's right and wrong and how to think. I don't think many people do.
What element of any game has ever been "forced down" anyone's throat?? If any element of any game affects you in a negative way THAT strongly, just don't play the damn thing. Take for example Duke Nukem Forever. I think it's a repugnant game on just about every level, from it's tone and message to the laziness if employs in executing even those concepts. I'm not gonna get all up in arms about it, I'm just not going to play it.
I keep hearing about how "social justice" is creeping into games, but I fail to see it anywhere. Last time I checked Grand Theft Auto is still one of the most popular game franchises in the world (which I also enjoy despite being very far to the left poltically). Is there a less PC game than any Grand Theft Auto title?? Practically ANY first person shooter?? Where are these games forcing social justice ideas onto people?? They seem to be a myth more than a tangible product that exists.
The fact that you're condoning something called social justice warfare is telling.
You know some people have different views than you and that's ok, right? Developers are more than welcome to try to influence the player's opinion on certain subjects, but forcing it down someone's throat is not progressive - it's regressive. Like I voted, I'm fine with it if it's not preachy. Having a gay or trans character in your game is fine, who cares, but I don't enjoy being told what's right and wrong and how to think. I don't think many people do.
The fact that the OP picked those poll options to slant the discussion in a certain direction is telling as well. As I said in a previous post I think "warfare" was intentionally picked as provocative. When I see polls with silly options I tend to pick them on a whim sometimes.
I agree that it is perfectly and normal that people have different opinions. I haven't told anyone here what to do or think to the best of my knowledge and I apologize if anything I said came across that way.
I guess I don't understand what things have been forced down people's throats. Could you please give an example in the BG series like that?
The fact that you're condoning something called social justice warfare is telling. ,/blockquote>
Yes, but it doesn't tell what you think it tells.
"Social Justice Warrior"/SJW is a term applied to people and not necessarily a term they choose for themselves. The poll calls it "social justice warfare" but I think you'll find people who support it might have different words for it that don't call violent action to mind.
The fact that you're condoning something called social justice warfare is telling.
You know some people have different views than you and that's ok, right? Developers are more than welcome to try to influence the player's opinion on certain subjects, but forcing it down someone's throat is not progressive - it's regressive. Like I voted, I'm fine with it if it's not preachy. Having a gay or trans character in your game is fine, who cares, but I don't enjoy being told what's right and wrong and how to think. I don't think many people do.
What element of any game has ever been "forced down" anyone's throat?? If any element of any game affects you in a negative way THAT strongly, just don't play the damn thing. Take for example Duke Nukem Forever. I think it's a repugnant game on just about every level, from it's tone and message to the laziness if employs in executing even those concepts. I'm not gonna get all up in arms about it, I'm just not going to play it.
I keep hearing about how "social justice" is creeping into games, but I fail to see it anywhere. Last time I checked Grand Theft Auto is still one of the most popular game franchises in the world (which I also enjoy despite being very far to the left poltically). Is there a less PC game than any Grand Theft Auto title?? Practically ANY first person shooter?? Where are these games forcing social justice ideas onto people?? They seem to be a myth more than a tangible product that exists.
I don't know what you'rte referring to because I didn't make any of the points you're attacking? You're acting like I'm upset when I'm simply sharing my opinion on the subject that the OT made.
I haven't played many games where it is forced down your throat. I simply said that games shouldn't do that to begin with. And yes, you're right, I wouldn't play a game that did that - just as you don't play Duke Nukem Forever. But that also means that the developer just lost a sale.
The fact that you're condoning something called social justice warfare is telling. ,/blockquote>
Yes, but it doesn't tell what you think it tells.
"Social Justice Warrior"/SJW is a term applied to people and not necessarily a term they choose for themselves. The poll calls it "social justice warfare" but I think you'll find people who support it might have different words for it that don't call violent action to mind.
Social Justice Warrior was term I hadn't even heard until this Siege of Dragonspear nonsense, and then I found out I not only was one, but apparently am a front-line soldier in a war I didn't even know was taking place.
So... you think that opinion "homosexuality should be under death penalty" is as correct as"homosexuality is okay"?
I agree with you. However, the thing is, in this day in age, sometimes it feels like we're in a shoot first ask later world when rather than say "stop hating gays" you ask, "why do you hate gays?"
You seem to be assuming that other viewpoints are less correct than your own or not correct in any way and therefore not worthwhile.
So... you think that opinion "homosexuality should be under death penalty" is as correct as"homosexuality is okay"?
Sadly, in many countries around the world the first statement is as "correct" as the second statement. I do not say "right" for I do not believe it to be "right". That does not prevent me from trying to understand the basis for that viewpoint. "Why" people think a certain way is generally more important than the "way" they think. Understanding is one of the most important parts of a civil society and it saddens me that we seem to be losing that concept.
in this day in age, sometimes it feels like we're in a shoot first ask later world when rather than say "stop hating gays" you ask, "why do you hate gays?"
The path to growth begins with understanding.
I didn't follow this. Is asking that question the "shoot" option or the "ask" option? Which are you suggesting we should say?
in this day in age, sometimes it feels like we're in a shoot first ask later world when rather than say "stop hating gays" you ask, "why do you hate gays?"
The path to growth begins with understanding.
I didn't follow this. Is asking that question the "shoot" option or the "ask" option? Which are you suggesting we should say?
@FinneousPJ: Sadly, I am. It seems to say we're in a "shoot first ask later" world because people ask a question rather than making a statement. Which would be kind of backwards, right?
Shoot First, ask later is a saying. Think in high fantasy settings. The civilized races see Orcs and, most often, laden them with Xbow bolts regardless of what they may say, almost before even letting them speak. In a less extreme version, the humans might simply assume the orcs are evil because they're orcs.
In a modern sense, the idea is, one who may have a different viewpoint is shot down as a ____phobe. You don't believe in the wage gap? You're a sexist white male pig! You like a different politician than me? You're a fascist redneck. Are you wearing a shirt with sexy women on it? I know nothing about you but I'll assume you're a bad guy anyway and try and ruin your reputation.
Instead of assuming, or the 'shoot', I'd ask why someone believes that way.
@FinneousPJ: If someone is at the level of explicitly saying they hate gay people, then I'm honestly not interested in having a conversation. I think a more common complaint among social conservatives in the U.S. is the assumption that their positions are based on hatred. So if someone is against gay marriage, for example, then we can have a conversation about why, and I would try to avoid accusing that person of hating gay people.
@joluv How would you engage a homophobe in productive conversation (on the topic of gays)?
It's best not to engage these people at all really....I've found that it's mostly a futile effort to try convince someone with such backwards and irrational views on much of anything. At best you can avoid controversial topics....
@joluv So you think no conversation is best? Please don't offer advice on starting a productive conversation if that is the case. It doesn't really make sense. I don't think shutting down and refusing to converse with other people is the way forward.
I'm willing to have conversations about a lot of stuff and with a lot of people with different viewpoints. But if someone openly hates an entire population group over some immutable characteristic, then what can I say to that? There's nothing to say but "Stop. Stop hating other people for things they can't change." If someone doesn't think that kind of hatred is wrong, then their moral system so radically, fundamentally different from my own that I have no idea how to even begin reasoning with them. Do you really think it's wrong for me not to engage with open hatred?
Comments
No one's viewpoint is going to be correct, that's accurate and that reinforces my point.
Once again, you're assuming that the developer is going to bring some new worldview to the table. Social justice exists outside games and has a wide variety of topics covering almost everything. Extremely doubtful that I'm going to learn something new about social justice from a video game, lol.
'tis just a jest remark, but still.
You know some people have different views than you and that's ok, right? Developers are more than welcome to try to influence the player's opinion on certain subjects, but forcing it down someone's throat is not progressive - it's regressive. Like I voted, I'm fine with it if it's not preachy. Having a gay or trans character in your game is fine, who cares, but I don't enjoy being told what's right and wrong and how to think. I don't think many people do.
I keep hearing about how "social justice" is creeping into games, but I fail to see it anywhere. Last time I checked Grand Theft Auto is still one of the most popular game franchises in the world (which I also enjoy despite being very far to the left poltically). Is there a less PC game than any Grand Theft Auto title?? Practically ANY first person shooter?? Where are these games forcing social justice ideas onto people?? They seem to be a myth more than a tangible product that exists.
I agree that it is perfectly and normal that people have different opinions. I haven't told anyone here what to do or think to the best of my knowledge and I apologize if anything I said came across that way.
I guess I don't understand what things have been forced down people's throats. Could you please give an example in the BG series like that?
I haven't played many games where it is forced down your throat. I simply said that games shouldn't do that to begin with. And yes, you're right, I wouldn't play a game that did that - just as you don't play Duke Nukem Forever. But that also means that the developer just lost a sale.
The path to growth begins with understanding.
Sadly, in many countries around the world the first statement is as "correct" as the second statement. I do not say "right" for I do not believe it to be "right". That does not prevent me from trying to understand the basis for that viewpoint. "Why" people think a certain way is generally more important than the "way" they think. Understanding is one of the most important parts of a civil society and it saddens me that we seem to be losing that concept.
In a modern sense, the idea is, one who may have a different viewpoint is shot down as a ____phobe. You don't believe in the wage gap? You're a sexist white male pig! You like a different politician than me? You're a fascist redneck. Are you wearing a shirt with sexy women on it? I know nothing about you but I'll assume you're a bad guy anyway and try and ruin your reputation.
Instead of assuming, or the 'shoot', I'd ask why someone believes that way.
@Dazzu: Thank you for clarifying, but I don't think that "Why do you hate gays?" is really ever the start to a productive conversation.