By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - IGN takes issue with white male lead in Days Gone.

Last edited by Welfare - on 06 March 2019

Won bet with t3mporary_126 - I correctly predicted that the Wii U's LTD at the end of 2014 would be closer to 9 million than 10 million. http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=6673287

Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:
0D0 said:
Regardless, I reckon nobody's allowed to say "yet another Black character" in any circumstance whatsoever without being called racist. Even on the right context, there are certain criticisms that can only be said about white people.

Yesterday on Twitter I saw I tweet saying something like "only shitty white males like it". I wonder if we can tweet something like "only shitty black males like it" without being called the police upon.

Yet another black guy or yet another bassy voiced hulking character using street slang?

See, the first one is bad.  The second one is a character trope.  People get tired of character tropes.  Remember the bald, space marine trope? The shirtless, bandana wearing Rambo trope? Or the buxom busted chick with attitude trope?  It's not their race.  It's not their sex.  It's not the their demeanor.  It's their trope.  A combination of character traits that may start off interesting but then itself becomes a generic character type that gets boring after the nth iteration.

But why does it have to bewhite? Why can't it be a biker of any colour? He could have said this instead.   "“While I’ll admit that I initially rolled my eyes at yet another Gruff Protagonist." I removed the white and male. Gender and skin colour shouldn't be an issue. 



SpokenTruth said:
0D0 said:
Regardless, I reckon nobody's allowed to say "yet another Black character" in any circumstance whatsoever without being called racist. Even on the right context, there are certain criticisms that can only be said about white people.

Yesterday on Twitter I saw I tweet saying something like "only shitty white males like it". I wonder if we can tweet something like "only shitty black males like it" without being called the police upon.

Yet another black guy or yet another bassy voiced hulking character using street slang?

See, the first one is bad.  The second one is a character trope.  People get tired of character tropes.  Remember the bald, space marine trope? The shirtless, bandana wearing Rambo trope? Or the buxom busted chick with attitude trope?  It's not their race.  It's not their sex.  It's not the their demeanor.  It's their trope.  A combination of character traits that may start off interesting but then itself becomes a generic character type that gets boring after the nth iteration.

We aren't even talking about a trope, we're talking about the attempt to create a trope in order to satisfy an agenda.  "Gruff White Male Protagonist" is nothing but smoke and mirrors.  We're supposed to believe that "Gruff" is the primary descriptor?  Bullshit.  What is that even supposed to mean?  That the person fighting to survive in a living hell isn't dancing and singing as they fight zombies?  A serious character in a serious game isn't a trope, it's just common sense.  

Looking at a character and deciding that they're boring just because they look kinda-sorta similar to other characters is shallow and unimaginative.  I'm reading a really good book right now where one of the characters is a beautiful princess with long, golden hair.  Gosh, how boring--except, of course, that she's one of the best characters in the book because events turned her from a spoiled child into someone ruthless and unhinged.  

Last edited by pokoko - on 06 March 2019

DarthMetalliCube said:
ArchangelMadzz said:

Because there aren't a million games out there with a gruffy gravel voice bearded Asian dudes. 

It's not a racist statement. When I watch a TV show and see a character and think 'oh great, another loud angry black female character'. It's not racist to say that, it's okay to be tired of a character trope that's been over done because the first thing you think of is the lack of imagination that went into it. If I said 'oh great anther black female character' or 'oh great other white male' that would be racist. 

Well that's where we disagree then I suppose. A simple observation or describing attributes is one thing, but if it's inferred that the color of one's skin somehow makes for a negative attribute (or even a small factor), I don't see how that can be construded as anything other than a racist observation, at least to a small degree. 

I totally get that there are certain "tropes" that I feel would be a positive for arts and entertainment to steer from and utilize more unique, underrepresented attributes. But I don't know.. for my money at least - a person's (real or fictional) personality, actions, overall character, etc is far far more important than simply the way they look, especially with baked in traits like race. But maybe that's just me. 

No it's not saying the colour of the skin is a negative attribute. 

Im not sure how I can be more clear, it's not that being black or white is bad it's that there's character tropes associated with races and when they're beat to death it's very very boring. 

It's not being inferred that the skin colour is bad, you're wrong. It's that having a game and deciding the main character to be another one of many bearded Gruffy white guys is a bit unimaginative and boring. That'd the point. It's not that he's white. If I continue I'm just gonna repeat my last comment but it applies so just copy and paste the last bit of my response again here.



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

pokoko said:
SpokenTruth said:

Yet another black guy or yet another bassy voiced hulking character using street slang?

See, the first one is bad.  The second one is a character trope.  People get tired of character tropes.  Remember the bald, space marine trope? The shirtless, bandana wearing Rambo trope? Or the buxom busted chick with attitude trope?  It's not their race.  It's not their sex.  It's not the their demeanor.  It's their trope.  A combination of character traits that may start off interesting but then itself becomes a generic character type that gets boring after the nth iteration.

We aren't even talking about a trope, we're talking about the attempt to create a trope in order to satisfy an agenda.  "Gruff White Male Protagonist" is nothing but smoke and mirrors.  We're supposed to believe that "Gruff" is the primary descriptor?  Bullshit.  What is that even supposed to mean?  That the person fighting to survive in a living hell isn't dancing and singing as they fight zombies?  A serious character in a serious game isn't a trope, it's just common sense.  

Looking at a character and deciding that they're boring just because they look kinda-sorta similar to other characters is shallow and unimaginative.  I'm reading a really good book right now where one of the characters is a beautiful princess with long, golden hair.  Gosh, how boring--except, of course, that she's one of the best characters in the book because events turned her from a spoiled child into someone ruthless and unhinged.  

Wait so you're saying you're consuming a piece of media where at first impression the character is a boring trope but turns out to be really interesting? 

 

Man if only the article said something like that...



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:
Kerotan said:

But why does it have to bewhite? Why can't it be a biker of any colour? He could have said this instead.   "“While I’ll admit that I initially rolled my eyes at yet another Gruff Protagonist." I removed the white and male. Gender and skin colour shouldn't be an issue. 

Because that's all part of that trope. Color and sex are part of the gruff aspect of that character trope.  If it were a gruff Asian female, well that certainly wouldn't fit the trope, now would it?  That would be something largely new and not over-saturated in the industry.

pokoko said:

We aren't even talking about a trope, we're talking about the attempt to create a trope in order to satisfy an agenda.  "Gruff White Male Protagonist" is nothing but smoke and mirrors.  We're supposed to believe that "Gruff" is the primary descriptor?  Bullshit.  What is that even supposed to mean?  That the person fighting to survive in a living hell isn't dancing and singing as they fight zombies?  A serious character in a serious game isn't a trope, it's just common sense.  

Looking at a character and deciding that they're boring just because they look kinda-sorta similar to other characters is shallow and unimaginative.  I'm reading a really good book right now where one of the characters is a beautiful princess with long, golden hair.  Gosh, how boring--except, of course, that she's one of the best characters in the book because events turned her from a spoiled child into someone ruthless and unhinged.  

But we are talking about a trope here. We're supposed to believe that gruff, white and male are the primary characteristics. It's the whole package, not just gruff.

And by the way, beautiful, white females with long golden hair as a princess is also a boring old trope.  You're literally calling his initial reaction as unimaginative without grasping the irony of the the game (book, movie, etc...) using an unimaginative trope for a character.

if the game was set in China and the Protagonist was a white male they might have a point. it's set in America and they went with the most likely type. are they really using gruff as a reason though? what should bend have gone with a slick, clean shaven asian in a james bond suit to make it interesting? As far as I'm concerned i don't judge a games character on the skin colour or race. my thought process doesn't function like that. 



ArchangelMadzz said:
pokoko said:

We aren't even talking about a trope, we're talking about the attempt to create a trope in order to satisfy an agenda.  "Gruff White Male Protagonist" is nothing but smoke and mirrors.  We're supposed to believe that "Gruff" is the primary descriptor?  Bullshit.  What is that even supposed to mean?  That the person fighting to survive in a living hell isn't dancing and singing as they fight zombies?  A serious character in a serious game isn't a trope, it's just common sense.  

Looking at a character and deciding that they're boring just because they look kinda-sorta similar to other characters is shallow and unimaginative.  I'm reading a really good book right now where one of the characters is a beautiful princess with long, golden hair.  Gosh, how boring--except, of course, that she's one of the best characters in the book because events turned her from a spoiled child into someone ruthless and unhinged.  

Wait so you're saying you're consuming a piece of media where at first impression the character is a boring trope but turns out to be really interesting? 

 

Man if only the article said something like that...

Er, no.  I'm saying that it would have been stupid of me to dismiss that character as a "boring trope" simply because of their appearance.

SpokenTruth said:
Kerotan said:

But why does it have to bewhite? Why can't it be a biker of any colour? He could have said this instead.   "“While I’ll admit that I initially rolled my eyes at yet another Gruff Protagonist." I removed the white and male. Gender and skin colour shouldn't be an issue. 

Because that's all part of that trope. Color and sex are part of the gruff aspect of that character trope.  If it were a gruff Asian female, well that certainly wouldn't fit the trope, now would it?  That would be something largely new and not over-saturated in the industry.

pokoko said:

We aren't even talking about a trope, we're talking about the attempt to create a trope in order to satisfy an agenda.  "Gruff White Male Protagonist" is nothing but smoke and mirrors.  We're supposed to believe that "Gruff" is the primary descriptor?  Bullshit.  What is that even supposed to mean?  That the person fighting to survive in a living hell isn't dancing and singing as they fight zombies?  A serious character in a serious game isn't a trope, it's just common sense.  

Looking at a character and deciding that they're boring just because they look kinda-sorta similar to other characters is shallow and unimaginative.  I'm reading a really good book right now where one of the characters is a beautiful princess with long, golden hair.  Gosh, how boring--except, of course, that she's one of the best characters in the book because events turned her from a spoiled child into someone ruthless and unhinged.  

But we are talking about a trope here. We're supposed to believe that gruff, white and male are the primary characteristics. It's the whole package, not just gruff.

And by the way, beautiful, white females with long golden hair as a princess is also a boring old trope.  You're literally calling his initial reaction as unimaginative without grasping the irony of the the game (book, movie, etc...) using an unimaginative trope for a character.

That's so basic as to be meaningless.  Orange cats are tropes.  Black dogs are tropes.  Fish that swim are tropes.  When you get to that point then it's just looking for stuff to call a trope.  A serious white male character is a trope only to those who want it to be a trope so they can complain about it.  Otherwise it would just be a normal character.

My point, which you seemed to miss, is that anyone who is so shallow that they look at a character they don't know anything about and think, "that's a boring trope," is a slave to their own ignorance.  The princess I described is obviously not a boring trope and I have no clue how you came to that conclusion.  Did you not read my description?  What are you even talking about?  I just explained to you that she was very well written and developed.  But I'm supposed to dismiss her because she's a blonde princess?  No.

People who think like that, "oh, that's a trope, I can just assume I understand everything about that character," are just fooling themselves with meaningless assumptions--and risking looking like fools when their assumptions are wrong.  The article illustrates that perfectly.



SpokenTruth said:
pokoko said:

That's so basic as to be meaningless.  Orange cats are tropes.  Black dogs are tropes.  Fish that swim are tropes. 

Oh, so you don't know what a trope means.  That explains why you aren't understanding my posts.  Perhaps I should call them cliches.  Does that make more sense now?

You think a trope is the same thing as a cliche and you're saying that I'm the one who doesn't know what it means?  That's interesting.



pokoko said:
SpokenTruth said:

Oh, so you don't know what a trope means.  That explains why you aren't understanding my posts.  Perhaps I should call them cliches.  Does that make more sense now?

You think a trope is the same thing as a cliche and you're saying that I'm the one who doesn't know what it means?  That's interesting.

I wasn't the one you were talking to, but yeah, they are basically synonyms.

Here is Merriam Webster:

"Trope: a common or overused theme or device : cliche"



sundin13 said:
pokoko said:

You think a trope is the same thing as a cliche and you're saying that I'm the one who doesn't know what it means?  That's interesting.

I wasn't the one you were talking to, but yeah, they are basically synonyms.

Here is Merriam Webster:

"Trope: a common or overused theme or device : cliche"

I disagree with that definition.  The way trope is popularly used, it's often not to the point of cliche.