Forums - General Discussion - I'm tired of this overemphasis on diversity spilling into our entertainment.

When diversity is forced in already established games yeah its annoying. But if brand new games have it from the start it's fine.



3DS: 5429-9952-3189  Add me if you wish!

Around the Network
Azuren said:

You did. And then you kept asserting that discrimination based on things people can't change is okay, which is bigotry. So how am I supposed to walk away from bigotry claiming to be in the right?

 

We live in about as much of a post-discrimination society as it's going to get. Lines are never going to vanish, because that's just how some people are. But to blanket entire communities and ethnicities with general statements won't help. Assuming that every black man is ironically the short person in your visual aid is soft bigotry, and assuming every white man is the tall one is also a form of bigotry. Everyone has different places they come from. A black kid in Orange county is not worse off than a white kid in Cincinnati. You wanna talk to me about context and history, and then you imply that all black people need help while white people deserve persecution for the color of their skin? So please: continue with the bigoted comments. Maybe post a few more pictures that explain this flawed world view. But maybe one day you'll open your eyes and realize that "holy shit, blaming and persecuting the ancestors of persecutors only perpetuates persecution."

 

And yeah, you kind of walked yourself into a minefield. I already said that the shit comedy played a role in the Ghostbusters movie sucking. Then you proceeded to walk your ideology off of a cliff without realizing. So please, pick a question to answer. Doesn't have to be all of them, I'd just like to see leftist rhetoric collapse under the weight of its own bullshit.

You're losing me here. On all points. This is slowly getting more and more shifted into a conversation I'm not having, that I assume you're more comfortable with. Ive been ignoring your leftist vs right meme because I dont care about that at all, every country has thier own views of what is left or right anyways. I'll probably check out for real now because while discussions are nice, three way discussions with two people are not. You are free to chalk this up as an epik win vs a DESTROYED leftist. I'm trying to be as neutral as possible here but it's pointless when you're veering off into whatever this is.

My perspectives come from the fact that I live in the caribbean, where Ive had to learn about the relationships between countries and races all my life. I certainly disagree that this is as good as it gets. And while you're right in looking at those very specific, individual people, there are still systematic things that affect a group that cant be ignored. Even if literally not every single person is personally affected. And that image is as simple as it gets, so there really is no point going further after that. Also I see you're trying to appeal to emotion by saying stuff like bigotry, discrimination, and the like in the hopes that those names will make me feel bad and come on your side, but that's not happening.

I mean it's pretty easy to walk, I'm walking away from your incorrect points without much harm to my day. Unless you think this thread is more important than I do. Or that I'm exausting my points because I have nothing else to say. Like, you're approaching this from the mindset you are objectively right, which really isnt helpful. Even if I think I'm right, in a conversation like this, asserting this so hard really wont help.

On that last point I have no idea what you're talking about, ive been very clear on what I sad relating to ghostbusters and you keep adding other shit. The biggest reason the movie sucked was the humour. I'm not invested enough to get baited into complaining about other things or latching on to any other points you wanna debate today, find someone else for that.

Last edited by Smear-Gel - on 22 May 2018

 

collint0101 said:
Azuren said:

And there wouldn't be a double standard in your case if they made Falcon white, right?

 

Changing age isn't a big deal, since most instance of FF take place during Johnny being an adult, meaning making the movie with a kid would have thrown off the general population who know adult Johnny from the cartoon and comics. Civil War changed in its entirety because Fox owned the mutants, who were a HUGE point of contention and practically the point of Civil War.

 

But do you have any instances of this double standard that aren't super easily debunked?

Spiderman wasn't 15 during civil war, planet hulk didn't feature Thor, captain America was supposed to die at the end of civil war ect but I'm sure you're going to twist yourselve in knots trying to justify why all of those changes are fine but making a minor characters like Ben Urich black is the end of the world. 

You keep bringing up age like it's a big deal, but it isn't.

 

Planet Hulk was either not going to happen at all because of Universal, or it was going to be a cameo arc. I'd rather have some than none.

 

You know, you keep circling back around to Civil War, but literally everything wrong with it has to do with the fact that X-Men isn't there. Not having mutants in it changes the entire story from the ground up, which is *gasp* another studio issue. 

 

And I'm sure you'll twist yourself in knots trying to come up with more examples. Maybe you'll start vetting them a bit more, but I'm sure I'll get to repeat the lines about Civil War a few more times. And people don't generally complain about minor characters (unless you consider major characters like Johnny Storm and Domino to actually be minor).



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Azuren said:
collint0101 said:

Spiderman wasn't 15 during civil war, planet hulk didn't feature Thor, captain America was supposed to die at the end of civil war ect but I'm sure you're going to twist yourselve in knots trying to justify why all of those changes are fine but making a minor characters like Ben Urich black is the end of the world. 

You keep bringing up age like it's a big deal, but it isn't.

 

Planet Hulk was either not going to happen at all because of Universal, or it was going to be a cameo arc. I'd rather have some than none.

 

You know, you keep circling back around to Civil War, but literally everything wrong with it has to do with the fact that X-Men isn't there. Not having mutants in it changes the entire story from the ground up, which is *gasp* another studio issue. 

 

And I'm sure you'll twist yourself in knots trying to come up with more examples. Maybe you'll start vetting them a bit more, but I'm sure I'll get to repeat the lines about Civil War a few more times. And people don't generally complain about minor characters (unless you consider major characters like Johnny Storm and Domino to actually be minor).

Ok you want some non civil war examples. Days of future past was about kitty pryde not wolverine, captain marvel didn't show up 20 years before characters like spiderman and iron Man, ant man and wasp were on the original avengers team, Ultron actually managed to stick around for more than a few days and I can easily go on. I honestly can't think of a single super hero movie that accurately follows the comics even in situations where there's no legal reason for them change things but like I said no one cares until they change someone's race. If the internet existed 20 years ago people like you probably would have complained about ultimate Nick fury being a black guy but wouldn't say a word about the dozens of other differences between the ultimate and 616 universe



Smear-Gel said:
Azuren said:

You did. And then you kept asserting that discrimination based on things people can't change is okay, which is bigotry. So how am I supposed to walk away from bigotry claiming to be in the right?

 

We live in about as much of a post-discrimination society as it's going to get. Lines are never going to vanish, because that's just how some people are. But to blanket entire communities and ethnicities with general statements won't help. Assuming that every black man is ironically the short person in your visual aid is soft bigotry, and assuming every white man is the tall one is also a form of bigotry. Everyone has different places they come from. A black kid in Orange county is not worse off than a white kid in Cincinnati. You wanna talk to me about context and history, and then you imply that all black people need help while white people deserve persecution for the color of their skin? So please: continue with the bigoted comments. Maybe post a few more pictures that explain this flawed world view. But maybe one day you'll open your eyes and realize that "holy shit, blaming and persecuting the ancestors of persecutors only perpetuates persecution."

 

And yeah, you kind of walked yourself into a minefield. I already said that the shit comedy played a role in the Ghostbusters movie sucking. Then you proceeded to walk your ideology off of a cliff without realizing. So please, pick a question to answer. Doesn't have to be all of them, I'd just like to see leftist rhetoric collapse under the weight of its own bullshit.

You're losing me here. On all points. This is slowly getting more and more shifted into a conversation I'm not having, that I assume you're more comfortable with. Ive been ignoring your leftist vs right meme because I dont care about that at all, every country has thier own views of what is left or right anyways. I'll probably check out for real now because while discussions are nice, three way discussions with two people are not. You are free to chalk this up as an epik win vs a DESTROYED leftist. I'm trying to be as neutral as possible here but it's pointless when you're veering off into whatever this is.

My perspectives come from the fact that I live in the caribbean, where Ive had to learn about the relationships between countries and races all my life. I certainly disagree that this is as good as it gets. And while you're right in looking at those very specific, individual people, there are still systematic things that affect a group that cant be ignored. Even if literally not every single person is personally affected. And that image is as simple as it gets, so there really is no point going further after that. Also I see you're trying to appeal to emotion by saying stuff like bigotry, discrimination, and the like in the hopes that those names will make me feel bad and come on your side, but that's not happening.

I mean it's pretty easy to walk, I'm walking away from your incorrect points without much harm to my day. Unless you think this thread is more important than I do. Or that I'm exausting my points because I have nothing else to say. Like, you're approaching this from the mindset you are objectively right, which really isnt helpful. Even if I think I'm right, in a conversation like this, asserting this so hard really wont help.

On that last point I have no idea what you're talking about, ive been very clear on what I sad relating to ghostbusters and you keep adding other shit. The biggest reason the movie sucked was the humour. I'm not invested enough to get baited into complaining about other things or latching on to any other points you wanna debate today, find someone else for that.

If you don't want to be a "DESTROYED LEFTIST", then start making arguments that aren't steeped in racial or gender bigotry. Because if you come at me with that bullshit, I'm gonna slap it down every time for the bigotry that it is.

 

Also, I think you mean systemic, since that would refer to things like racism that exist in clear opposition to the law. Systemically, there's only one group of people with laws specifically passed against their favor (in America, at least), and that's men. And I'm not using terms like bigot and racist to sway you; that's just what things that you're defending are. If you're going to say it's okay for a black person to play a white character but not the other way around, then congratulations: that's racism. Argue it all you want, that's what it is.

 

And yeah, I suppose it would be easy for someone who knows he's wrong deep down to walk away. I mean, if I felt somewhere in my heart that "Maybe that's not racist", I would gradually move away from the conversation. But no, instead there's someone insisting on something that matches the definition of racism to a tee isn't actually racism, but is only fair.

 

Yeah, and then I asked very simple questions that, upon answering one truthfully, would see your entire ideology collapse on top of you.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Around the Network
Snoopy said:
the-pi-guy said:

I'm wondering how on Earth, the Death Note movie has anything to do with this thread.  

 

Movie was a tragedy, and L was almost a highlight.  

The character "L" seemed force for diversity reason imo. Completly different from the anime show.

I’m guessing that’s similar to fox making Johnny storm black in the newest fantastic four movie, electro was also black in the amazing Spider-Man 2, and now the new ninja turtles show has a black April? 

 

Im not really understanding why entertainment companies lately are taking known characters and changing their original gender or race. Why not just come up with brand new characters who are male, female, black, gay, whatever, instead of altering famous established characters. That would be like making black panther white or Asian. It wouldn’t look right. 

 

As for the death note movie, that was a colossal train wreck. 



collint0101 said:
Azuren said:

You keep bringing up age like it's a big deal, but it isn't.

 

Planet Hulk was either not going to happen at all because of Universal, or it was going to be a cameo arc. I'd rather have some than none.

 

You know, you keep circling back around to Civil War, but literally everything wrong with it has to do with the fact that X-Men isn't there. Not having mutants in it changes the entire story from the ground up, which is *gasp* another studio issue. 

 

And I'm sure you'll twist yourself in knots trying to come up with more examples. Maybe you'll start vetting them a bit more, but I'm sure I'll get to repeat the lines about Civil War a few more times. And people don't generally complain about minor characters (unless you consider major characters like Johnny Storm and Domino to actually be minor).

Ok you want some non civil war examples. Days of future past was about kitty pryde not wolverine, captain marvel didn't show up 20 years before characters like spiderman and iron Man, ant man and wasp were on the original avengers team, Ultron actually managed to stick around for more than a few days and I can easily go on. I honestly can't think of a single super hero movie that accurately follows the comics even in situations where there's no legal reason for them change things but like I said no one cares until they change someone's race. If the internet existed 20 years ago people like you probably would have complained about ultimate Nick fury being a black guy but wouldn't say a word about the dozens of other differences between the ultimate and 616 universe

Days of Future past starred Wolverine because the timeline doesn't work the way it does in the comics and Kitty Pryde would not have been born yet.

 

We have absolutely zero context on why Carol is showing up so far in advance, so bringing this up is really just grasping for straws.

 

Ant-Man and Wasp were also viewed as B-tier characters at the time the first Avengers came out, and weren't given a chance until after the second Avengers.

 

Age of Ultron was already way too long, and partitioned movies usually catch a lot of negative response. Including all of his shenanigans would have taken up too much screen time.

 

Nick Fury (MCU) is based on Ultimate Nick Fury from the Ultimate Marvel comics; he has basis in comics, and has been a thing for 17 years.

 

And to sum things up: people don't like core aspects of what makes their character them being changed for what is literally no reason. You can change the age Peter Parker joined in the Civil War, but you can't decide Peter Parker is black. No, you make a black character to take that identity as well, like Miles Morales. No one's saying there can't be a black Wolverine. But James Howlett is a white canadian.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

I think some people are missing the point of this thread. I don't think the vast majority of people here actually have a problem with diversity in entertainment/media/culture. Why would they? Do you honestly think most reasonable white men are outraged by the fact that we're only featured in 70% of entertainment now rather than the 80% or so of the past?

Rather, the issue most have is what this obsession with diversity often implies - which is a laziness and a sort of easy solution to generate interest to or sell a product, while on another level undermining traits that REALLY matter with is actual content of the product, or the character or actions of the individuals.

Going back to the Ghostbusters example again - Sony completely sold the movie on the fact that "it's Ghostbusters with chicks!" to draw attention to it. Then when the vast majority slagged it for the dumpster fire it was (which had nothing to do with the fact that the protagonists were female), they were labeled sexists. And the movie got a ton of undeserved for attention for being essentially a shitty SNL style derpy comedy that's probably Adam Sander level of quality at best.

At the end of the day this phony importance placed on diversity often is just corporate marketing to be looked upon favorably by the keepers of the morals and cultural authorities in society, and provides an excuse for them to be lazy with their end product. It's a gimmick. At least this is the way I see it.



 

"We hold these truths t-be self-ful evident. All men and women created by the.. Go-you know the.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden

DarthMetalliCube said:
I think some people are missing the point of this thread. I don't think the vast majority of people here actually have a problem with diversity in entertainment/media/culture. Why would they? Do you honestly think most reasonable white men are outraged by the fact that we're only featured in 70% of entertainment now rather than the 80% or so of the past?

Rather, the issue most have is what this obsession with diversity often implies - which is a laziness and a sort of easy solution to generate interest to or sell a product, while on another level undermining traits that REALLY matter with is actual content of the product, or the character or actions of the individuals.

Going back to the Ghostbusters example again - Sony completely sold the movie on the fact that "it's Ghostbusters with chicks!" to draw attention to it. Then when the vast majority slagged it for the dumpster fire it was (which had nothing to do with the fact that the protagonists were female), they were labeled sexists. And the movie got a ton of undeserved for attention for being essentially a shitty SNL style derpy comedy that's probably Adam Sander level of quality at best.

At the end of the day this phony importance placed on diversity often is just corporate marketing to be looked upon favorably by the keepers of the morals and cultural authorities in society, and provides an excuse for them to be lazy with their end product. It's a gimmick. At least this is the way I see it.

You give them too much credit; Adam Sandler at least used to be hilarious (and Grown-Ups is actually a fun movie to watch, it just doesn't have a real climax).



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

VGPolyglot said:
outlawauron said:

Because something that is done for the sake of being that is not creating depth. It's literally the most shallow thing a trait can be and usually gets placed instead of actual meaningful character development. Multiple viewpoints and having a diverse casts are a good thing, but doing things for the sake of doing is lazy and worsens the product 99% of the time.

Is that and meaningful character development mutually exclusive?

They are mutually exclusive but in current gaming industry, they're pretty tied together. When the entire depth of a character is "they gay and stuff", then their effort to have a diverse character has now become the single defining trait of that character.

Smear-Gel said:
outlawauron said:

Because something that is done for the sake of being that is not creating depth. It's literally the most shallow thing a trait can be and usually gets placed instead of actual meaningful character development. Multiple viewpoints and having a diverse casts are a good thing, but doing things for the sake of doing is lazy and worsens the product 99% of the time.

There is no provable metric that shows doing something for the sake of it worsen's the product, especially since you yourself also say its shallow and thus, doesnt really matter.

Of course there's not a provable metric, but ultimately we're talking about subjective taste in the quality of a game's story and/or cast. That said, there are numerous observable cases of developers being directed to have more diverse characters for the sake of it and thus said characters being entirely one-dimensional and poorly developed (if at all).

Hopefully we get to a point where developers are able to have diverse casts and stories that aren't done in response to media.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.