Quantcast
What exactly do you consider to be "SJW agenda" in games?

Forums - Gaming Discussion - What exactly do you consider to be "SJW agenda" in games?

Does the inclusion of women in BFV bother you?

Yes 15 22.06%
 
No 53 77.94%
 
Total:68
Kirin_gaming said:
haxxiy said:

Dragon Age: Inquisition had more or less the demographic profile of the modern United States despite being set on a medieval copy of Great Britain and France, and inexplicably had modern atittutes towards transsexuality etc. as well.

Of course, the writers are free to make up a world emotionally appealing to their political views (since I believe indulging in idiosyncracies make fantasy more unique) but don't expect it to be free of criticism, specially if it looks dumb and strains suspension of disbelief.

That's the sort of thing that irks me, when it's absolutely forced and silly.

Dude Dragon Age is a fantasy world, FANTASY.

Does the game having 8 kinds of humanoids apart from humans also irk you?

Yeah, I have to agree with this.  Inventing a fantasy world styled on some historical point in time in the real world does not lock anyone into specific demographics for the invented world itself.  To be blunt, criticizing DA:I in this fashion simply screams someone looking for reasons to be offended.



Around the Network
shikamaru317 said:

Things I consider to be part of the SJW agenda

-Diversity that feels forced. BFV is a prime example of this category, as it features women fighting in combat roles for armies that specifically forbade women from serving in combat roles. Another hypothetical example would be a game set in the rural US that has as many black, hispanic, Asian, native American, etc. characters as white characters. In most rural areas in the US whites make up at least 70% of the total population according to census data (my own county, which is rural, is 95% white as of the 2010 census, while the largest city in my county is 85% white), having a ton of minority characters in such a game would be an example of forced diversity. Another example would be an RPG with a party that covers just about every race just to check-off the diversity box. 

-Anti-religious themes, particularly anti-Christian themes. SJW's can't stand Christians because the Bible speaks against a number of causes that they support, such as abortion and the LGBT movement, and many SJW's also have a problem with other religions for the same reason. As a result, some SJW developers will inject anti-religious themes into their games.

-Forced LGBT romance scenes featuring playable characters or common LGBT public displays of affection featuring NPC's. An example of this would be the lesbian kiss in TLOU2, as it is a forced story event as far as we know, not an optional romance option.

-Censoring or toning down of violence, in some misguided attempt to prevent school shootings or some other such nonsense. 

-Modern Left-wing ideals showing up in historical games where modern left-wing ideals didn't exist.

-Left-wing poltics showing up in modern or future setting games, unless they are countered by right-wing politics that are portrayed in a non-villainous way. 

-Removal of potentially offensive iconography because some wimp might not be able to handle seeing it. An example would be the removal of the Swastika from Battlefield V and CoD WW2 last year. 

-Censoring or toning down of sexy costumes. Some examples of this would be Nintendo of America/Europe not releasing Japanese DLC costumes for a number of games in recent years, because the outfits are sexy. Another example would be the seeming removal of sexy costumes in DoA 6 so far. 

-Feminists like Anita Sarkeesian who want to get rid of sexy female playable characters, under some misguided belief that it places unrealistic expectations on women or some other such nonsense, yet are ok with sexy male playable characters. 

-Attempts to block niche Japanese visual novels from release in the west because they contain sexual content.

 

Things I don't consider to be part of the SJW agenda

-Female playable characters or racial minority characters that make sense for the time period or geographical setting of the game. I have zero problems with female playable characters at all as long as they match the setting and don't feel forced, and even prefer them over male playable characters in many instances, frequently choosing female if there is a choice in game, like the upcoming AC Odyssey. Likewise I have no problem with minority race playable characters or party members as long as they match the setting.

-Optional LGBT romances. Bioware has had LGBT romance options since Juhani in KOTOR way back in 2003, and with only one exception (DA: Origins) I never had a problem with it because it never felt forced. DA:O was a different matter though, Zevran threw himself at me the whole game, which was quite annoying. As long as a developer makes this kind of content entirely optional I have zero problems with it.

Why are non-optional gay romance scenes a problem? Aren't them the same as non-optional hetero romance scenes? You're either for both or against both.



G O O D B O I

LuccaCardoso1 said:
shikamaru317 said:

Things I consider to be part of the SJW agenda

-Diversity that feels forced. BFV is a prime example of this category, as it features women fighting in combat roles for armies that specifically forbade women from serving in combat roles. Another hypothetical example would be a game set in the rural US that has as many black, hispanic, Asian, native American, etc. characters as white characters. In most rural areas in the US whites make up at least 70% of the total population according to census data (my own county, which is rural, is 95% white as of the 2010 census, while the largest city in my county is 85% white), having a ton of minority characters in such a game would be an example of forced diversity. Another example would be an RPG with a party that covers just about every race just to check-off the diversity box. 

-Anti-religious themes, particularly anti-Christian themes. SJW's can't stand Christians because the Bible speaks against a number of causes that they support, such as abortion and the LGBT movement, and many SJW's also have a problem with other religions for the same reason. As a result, some SJW developers will inject anti-religious themes into their games.

-Forced LGBT romance scenes featuring playable characters or common LGBT public displays of affection featuring NPC's. An example of this would be the lesbian kiss in TLOU2, as it is a forced story event as far as we know, not an optional romance option.

-Censoring or toning down of violence, in some misguided attempt to prevent school shootings or some other such nonsense. 

-Modern Left-wing ideals showing up in historical games where modern left-wing ideals didn't exist.

-Left-wing poltics showing up in modern or future setting games, unless they are countered by right-wing politics that are portrayed in a non-villainous way. 

-Removal of potentially offensive iconography because some wimp might not be able to handle seeing it. An example would be the removal of the Swastika from Battlefield V and CoD WW2 last year. 

-Censoring or toning down of sexy costumes. Some examples of this would be Nintendo of America/Europe not releasing Japanese DLC costumes for a number of games in recent years, because the outfits are sexy. Another example would be the seeming removal of sexy costumes in DoA 6 so far. 

-Feminists like Anita Sarkeesian who want to get rid of sexy female playable characters, under some misguided belief that it places unrealistic expectations on women or some other such nonsense, yet are ok with sexy male playable characters. 

-Attempts to block niche Japanese visual novels from release in the west because they contain sexual content.

 

Things I don't consider to be part of the SJW agenda

-Female playable characters or racial minority characters that make sense for the time period or geographical setting of the game. I have zero problems with female playable characters at all as long as they match the setting and don't feel forced, and even prefer them over male playable characters in many instances, frequently choosing female if there is a choice in game, like the upcoming AC Odyssey. Likewise I have no problem with minority race playable characters or party members as long as they match the setting.

-Optional LGBT romances. Bioware has had LGBT romance options since Juhani in KOTOR way back in 2003, and with only one exception (DA: Origins) I never had a problem with it because it never felt forced. DA:O was a different matter though, Zevran threw himself at me the whole game, which was quite annoying. As long as a developer makes this kind of content entirely optional I have zero problems with it.

Why are non-optional gay romance scenes a problem? Aren't them the same as non-optional hetero romance scenes? You're either for both or against both.

I disagree. Hetero relationships are the natural norm, because they serve the biological purpose of reproduction, seeing a man and a woman kiss shouldn't offend anybody. However some people might be offended by being forced to watch a lesbian or gay kiss when playing a game, for religious reasons or maybe they're just homophobic (not that I agree with homophobia). 



shikamaru317 said:
LuccaCardoso1 said:

Why are non-optional gay romance scenes a problem? Aren't them the same as non-optional hetero romance scenes? You're either for both or against both.

I disagree. Hetero relationships are the natural norm, because they serve the biological purpose of reproduction, seeing a man and a woman kiss shouldn't offend anybody. However some people might be offended by being forced to watch a lesbian or gay kiss when playing a game, for religious reasons or maybe they're just homophobic (not that I agree with homophobia). 

Homosexuality is as natural as heterosexuality. One is just more common than the other.

I don't see why a couple being able to reproduce makes them more socially acceptable. People don't have sex for reproduction 99% of the times they have sex anyway.

And as for people being offended by it because of religious reasons, games already show a lot of killing and blood. If one's not offended by that, I don't see why they should be offended by a kiss.

Do you think developers are pushing an SJW agenda for going against what a prejudiced group wants? There are few ideologies that I know are straight up wrong, and homophobia is one of them. Homophobia is just the modern version of racism.



G O O D B O I

shikamaru317 said: 

-snip-

Nailed it there. The only thing I would disagree is not being allowed to have a mandatory lesbian kiss.For the kiss in TLOU, Itself I thought it was just fine. But combined with the other things going on at ND it's becomes obvious that that specific instance is nothing more than a SJW agenda.



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Around the Network
LuccaCardoso1 said:
shikamaru317 said:

I disagree. Hetero relationships are the natural norm, because they serve the biological purpose of reproduction, seeing a man and a woman kiss shouldn't offend anybody. However some people might be offended by being forced to watch a lesbian or gay kiss when playing a game, for religious reasons or maybe they're just homophobic (not that I agree with homophobia). 

Homosexuality is as natural as heterosexuality. One is just more common than the other.

I don't see why a couple being able to reproduce makes them more socially acceptable. People don't have sex for reproduction 99% of the times they have sex anyway.

And as for people being offended by it because of religious reasons, games already show a lot of killing and blood. If one's not offended by that, I don't see why they should be offended by a kiss.

Do you think developers are pushing an SJW agenda for going against what a prejudiced group wants? There are few ideologies that I know are straight up wrong, and homophobia is one of them. Homophobia is just the modern version of racism.

Well, not really. Racism is still the modern version of racism

But yeah, pretty much agree with what you're saying there. I really don't see an issue with featuring a gay relationship. If people are "offended" for religious reasons then too bad, they chose their religion and therefore chose to be offended, no sympathy for that.



Bet Shiken that COD would outsell Battlefield in 2018. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8749702

LuccaCardoso1 said:
shikamaru317 said:

...

Why are non-optional gay romance scenes a problem? Aren't them the same as non-optional hetero romance scenes? You're either for both or against both.

Because the majority rule should be applied by default. It's like in a non chilly eating country you expect your food to be non chilly by default and when you go to a burger bar you have most burgers without chilly and it's not specifically indicated that they are not chilly. Of course you can have chilly as an extra if they offer it as an extra. Some burgers are chilly by default and this is specifically indicated, so the majority of people that don't like chilly will not be unpleasantly surprised. Of course there is nothing wrong to have a chilly food restaurant for chilly lovers were chilly food will be offered and if someone complained it's his problem not yours. In India it's the opposite - don't expect any indications on your food to alert you that it may be chilly. The majority are chilly eaters and they expect it to be chilly. It's your job as a minority non chilly eater to ask for non chilly food.



Ka-pi96 said:
Unrealistic diversity is the most obvious example. Like a cast with diverse ethnicities etc in a game set during modern times makes perfect sense, but something historical being changed to fit some "quota" is just ridiculous. A good example is when people bitched about there not being black people in Kingdom Come: Deliverance. Yeah, because black people were so common in medieval Bohemia...

Instead of bitching maybe those people should make a game set in medieval Africa instead. Then it could be all black people, and you know what I'd actually be interested in such a game. I enjoy historical games, especially if they're set in a region/time period I don't know much about so that would be a pretty cool idea for a game. And hey, I'd be happy if there weren't any white people in it too, since you simply wouldn't find white people in (sub-saharan) medieval Africa anyway so it would be as it should be.

Yep, we have norse, japanese, chinese, greek and couple other folk/legend times. I would like some South American, Soth African and North American legends/myths good games (and certainly would be disapointed if they decided to make the games in english with european skin).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

morenoingrato said:
An SJW agenda in games would be forced diversity and blatant political statements.

Yet most people here will freak over a woman in a game or really stretch games to make them seem as if they had an SJW agenda. Persecutory delusion.

Do you have the statistic for it? Sales of the games with woman doesn't seem to point people are generaly offended by woman being in games.

More funny is people atributing lack of woman or gay people in games as excuses for those groups not buying games, but forgeting that until perhaps PS1 most games had irrecognizable objects or animals for chars and since the 70's male were already a majority of gaming.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

shikamaru317 said:

Things I consider to be part of the SJW agenda

-Diversity that feels forced. BFV is a prime example of this category, as it features women fighting in combat roles for armies that specifically forbade women from serving in combat roles. Another hypothetical example would be a game set in the rural US that has as many black, hispanic, Asian, native American, etc. characters as white characters. In most rural areas in the US whites make up at least 70% of the total population according to census data (my own county, which is rural, is 95% white as of the 2010 census, while the largest city in my county is 85% white), having a ton of minority characters in such a game would be an example of forced diversity. Another example would be an RPG with a party that covers just about every race just to check-off the diversity box. 

-Anti-religious themes, particularly anti-Christian themes. SJW's can't stand Christians because the Bible speaks against a number of causes that they support, such as abortion and the LGBT movement, and many SJW's also have a problem with other religions for the same reason. As a result, some SJW developers will inject anti-religious themes into their games.

-Forced LGBT romance scenes featuring playable characters or common LGBT public displays of affection featuring NPC's. An example of this would be the lesbian kiss in TLOU2, as it is a forced story event as far as we know, not an optional romance option.

-Censoring or toning down of violence, in some misguided attempt to prevent school shootings or some other such nonsense. 

-Modern Left-wing ideals showing up in historical games where modern left-wing ideals didn't exist.

-Left-wing poltics showing up in modern or future setting games, unless they are countered by right-wing politics that are portrayed in a non-villainous way. 

-Removal of potentially offensive iconography because some wimp might not be able to handle seeing it. An example would be the removal of the Swastika from Battlefield V and CoD WW2 last year. 

-Censoring or toning down of sexy costumes. Some examples of this would be Nintendo of America/Europe not releasing Japanese DLC costumes for a number of games in recent years, because the outfits are sexy. Another example would be the seeming removal of sexy costumes in DoA 6 so far. 

-Feminists like Anita Sarkeesian who want to get rid of sexy female playable characters, under some misguided belief that it places unrealistic expectations on women or some other such nonsense, yet are ok with sexy male playable characters. 

-Attempts to block niche Japanese visual novels from release in the west because they contain sexual content.

 

Things I don't consider to be part of the SJW agenda

-Female playable characters or racial minority characters that make sense for the time period or geographical setting of the game. I have zero problems with female playable characters at all as long as they match the setting and don't feel forced, and even prefer them over male playable characters in many instances, frequently choosing female if there is a choice in game, like the upcoming AC Odyssey. Likewise I have no problem with minority race playable characters or party members as long as they match the setting.

-Optional LGBT romances. Bioware has had LGBT romance options since Juhani in KOTOR way back in 2003, and with only one exception (DA: Origins) I never had a problem with it because it never felt forced. DA:O was a different matter though, Zevran threw himself at me the whole game, which was quite annoying. As long as a developer makes this kind of content entirely optional I have zero problems with it.

You pretty much nailed it.

And fictional environment, no matter how much iit's losely based on any period in time, it is less problematic to be diverse (even if european or black samurai would be silly).

LuccaCardoso1 said:
shikamaru317 said:

Things I consider to be part of the SJW agenda

-Diversity that feels forced. BFV is a prime example of this category, as it features women fighting in combat roles for armies that specifically forbade women from serving in combat roles. Another hypothetical example would be a game set in the rural US that has as many black, hispanic, Asian, native American, etc. characters as white characters. In most rural areas in the US whites make up at least 70% of the total population according to census data (my own county, which is rural, is 95% white as of the 2010 census, while the largest city in my county is 85% white), having a ton of minority characters in such a game would be an example of forced diversity. Another example would be an RPG with a party that covers just about every race just to check-off the diversity box. 

-Anti-religious themes, particularly anti-Christian themes. SJW's can't stand Christians because the Bible speaks against a number of causes that they support, such as abortion and the LGBT movement, and many SJW's also have a problem with other religions for the same reason. As a result, some SJW developers will inject anti-religious themes into their games.

-Forced LGBT romance scenes featuring playable characters or common LGBT public displays of affection featuring NPC's. An example of this would be the lesbian kiss in TLOU2, as it is a forced story event as far as we know, not an optional romance option.

-Censoring or toning down of violence, in some misguided attempt to prevent school shootings or some other such nonsense. 

-Modern Left-wing ideals showing up in historical games where modern left-wing ideals didn't exist.

-Left-wing poltics showing up in modern or future setting games, unless they are countered by right-wing politics that are portrayed in a non-villainous way. 

-Removal of potentially offensive iconography because some wimp might not be able to handle seeing it. An example would be the removal of the Swastika from Battlefield V and CoD WW2 last year. 

-Censoring or toning down of sexy costumes. Some examples of this would be Nintendo of America/Europe not releasing Japanese DLC costumes for a number of games in recent years, because the outfits are sexy. Another example would be the seeming removal of sexy costumes in DoA 6 so far. 

-Feminists like Anita Sarkeesian who want to get rid of sexy female playable characters, under some misguided belief that it places unrealistic expectations on women or some other such nonsense, yet are ok with sexy male playable characters. 

-Attempts to block niche Japanese visual novels from release in the west because they contain sexual content.

 

Things I don't consider to be part of the SJW agenda

-Female playable characters or racial minority characters that make sense for the time period or geographical setting of the game. I have zero problems with female playable characters at all as long as they match the setting and don't feel forced, and even prefer them over male playable characters in many instances, frequently choosing female if there is a choice in game, like the upcoming AC Odyssey. Likewise I have no problem with minority race playable characters or party members as long as they match the setting.

-Optional LGBT romances. Bioware has had LGBT romance options since Juhani in KOTOR way back in 2003, and with only one exception (DA: Origins) I never had a problem with it because it never felt forced. DA:O was a different matter though, Zevran threw himself at me the whole game, which was quite annoying. As long as a developer makes this kind of content entirely optional I have zero problems with it.

Why are non-optional gay romance scenes a problem? Aren't them the same as non-optional hetero romance scenes? You're either for both or against both.

For me I would preffer none being displayed unless iit really is essential. Like in RL, I don't like public display of affection close to sexual encounters in the mid of day or open space of any type of couple. But I don't mind it if done on a place only for adults.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994