What? 

You're saying that there are checklists of certain buckets, and that it's harmful to actual representation.

And I'm saying you're wrong, because those certain buckets aren't what people are pushing for.

There's no length or nuance issue.

SBI Games as Per Wiki + Website.

1. Neo Cab - 75 OC / 81% Steam
2. Dota Underlords - NA OC / 82% Steam.
3. Assassin's Creed Valhalla - 83 OC / 70% Steam.
4. Dungeons & Dragons: Dark Alliance - 58 OC / 50% Steam.
5. Sable - 75 OC / 86% Steam.
6. Gotham Knights - 68 OC / 68% Steam.
7. God of War Ragnarök - 93 OC / NA Steam (But C'mon).
8. Shadow Gambit: The Cursed Crew - 85 OC / 93% Steam.
9. Goodbye Volcano High - 77 OC / 90% Steam.
10. The Crew Motorfest - 77 OC / 65% Steam.
11. Kingdom - 74 OC / 90% Steam.
12. Marvel's Spider-Man 2 - 90 OC / NA Steam (Again...C'mon).
13. Alan Wake 2 - 89 OC / 4.8 EGS (🤮 For EGS, Not AW2).
14. Suicide Squad: Kill The Justice League - 59 OC / 69% Steam.
15. Tales of Kenzera: Zau - 76 OC / 81% Steam.
16. Flintlock: The Siege of Dawn - 69 OC / 77% Steam.
17. Capes - 75 OC / 66% Steam.
18. Battle Shapers - NA OC / 81% Steam.

• Reviewers Rated Higher Than Steam - 4
• Steam Rated Higher Than Reviewers - 8
• Draw = 1
• N/A = 5
  
  
• Average Critic Reviewer = 76.4
• Average Steam Reviewer = 76.6
  
  
• Total OC Listed = 16
• Total Steam Listed = 15

Since SBI is the obvious one and current target of everyone's hatred I'm using them, I'm using OpenCritic because it's better than Metacritic and Steam because well it's the easiest to check out and has a better (albeit not perfect) review system than Xbox and I can't be bothered to check everyone's reviews, Steam is bigger than than both, it should be enough.

Just based on SBI alone I could make the argument that reviewers largely don't give a damn about this stuff either, Lol. They are not afraid to criticise games with "DEI" in them, they largely align with players as at the end of the day, a good game is a good game and a bad game is a bad game. Wanted to nip this argument in the bud a little more because I'm uncomfortable with going after journalists at large.

Now I'm going to try to move on from this thread for the most part because I'm frigging bored as I'm wasting far too much of my time on this, checking out credits of hundreds of employees, checking out dozens of games reviews, doing a bunch of research on games that I'll never play, don't care for or haven't even heard of, Lmfao. For something so utterly pointless, a dead game which died cause it was mid in a very competitive market.

It's interpreting my words in a way to "score points"

Actually, I do not know if that is the case because I cannot read minds. But I simply do not want to get bog down in a discussion about what I meant, then clarify what I meant, have a discussion about how my words should be interpreted and so on. That's what gets to these endless meaningless discussion we sometimes see on the forums. And I do not wish to contribute to that, because I don't think other readers will find that helpful.

To make a meaningful point I like to be concise and to the point and obviously that means being direct and less nuanced sometimes (I'm Dutch after all)

Sure, let's just pretend that Redfall belongs to a genre that is much more popular than Hero Shooters.

You all acting as if Hero Shooter fans will just spend the rest of eternity playing the current games and will never try a new one; and you all keep saying that like we didn't just see Marvel Rivals gathering around 20x more people than what Concord did when it was free to try.

But at least we're getting somewhere with your "bad characters" theory. Now let me ask you,

1) What do you think was it about these characters that made them unappealing to fans of the genre?
2) Due you think the lack of appeal of these characters was due to a simple lack of talent from the designers? or was it a lack of awareness of what the regular gamer want?
3) In case you pick lack of awareness, what do you think was the reasoning behind the design of these characters?

It doesn't have to be a more popular genre. It just has to be a less competitive one. Being the biggest in a specific niche is sometimes better than trying to compete in a big space. 

Well to me, even the better characters give me Dollar store versions of Guardians of the Galaxy vibes.  

And no it doesn't have anything to do with "DEI". Plenty of other games like Overwatch are far more inclusive and yet have far better designs. 

Then what are people pushing for?

People are pushing for "those 1000's of ethnicities". 

The point is having Korean developers tell their stories, Chinese developers tell theirs like Black Myth Wukong, etc.

The point isn't to have every single game check 6 arbitrary buckets or even have any game check 6 buckets. 

The point is that there's space for all kinds of people.

Get away from this mindset that drives these kinds of corporate thoughts:

Sony worried it was ‘risky’ to put a female hero at the heart of a big new game

Madame Web: Studios Are Blaming Women Instead Of Themselves

Good answer. That's what it should be.

There are many reasons why Concord failed as badly as it did, and alienating potential buyers is one of them. My point was simply that if you're making a big budget video game, it's generally best to appeal to what gamers want, and not come across as contemptuous towards a large percentage of your audience.

I already said I don't condone giving the devs a hard time and I never said anything about many of the points you take issue with, so I'm not sure what you want from me here.

How many of these potential buyers were even aware that there was a tiny notice in the corner of the screen of what pronouns someone uses?