Are you arguing that all RPGs should have obligatory customisation option? IMO it’s a logical for MMOs to have extensive customisation (or random generator like Rust did) but why insist on it in the case of singleplayer games? Shouldn’t it be left to the discretion of the creators? For example: Why Witcher should have the detailed customisation but Final Fantasy is left with the unchanging protagonist? Let developers decide on the degree of freedom they give players.
Yeah, so all the games allow you to customize your character to be a combat-witcher, a sign-witcher, or a potion-witcher, or any combination thereof.
Balancing for gameplay mechanics - ok.
Balancing to increase the appeal of the narrative to more people - not ok.
I want to think that you’re decent people, but you must, at some point, recognize that you are resembling trollies using illogic to defend hate and exclusion.
2 Likes
Nope. I am real people, albeit of a different opinion. And I think that there is certain fallacy in your reasoning - it is something that is only evident when you look from a certain distance as I do. It’s not that I accuse you of something, everyone is entitled to his/hers own worldview. It is a simple observation, nothing more. And it my be even misunderstanding. But up to the point - I think that you are implying a ‘racism by exclusion’, that not including PoC made the game improper and worthy of crytycism. You say that creators could easily include customisation - true enough, they could. But the whole point of discussion for me is WHY they should do it. That’s the point that I cannot understand - why should it be mandatory. True enough, if the game setting was in the NYC, exclusion of black people is a political statement and sort of racism. Yet this lore is based mostly on Tolkien, and the hero is very firmly established, he is albino and it is explained in story why he is. So somebody insisting on inluding PoC should explain WHY the player should have this option, thet clearly messes with the plot. And explain why he has a problem only with Witcher and not with Final Fanstasy. Let’s have a polite discussion.
2 Likes
So my actual point was precisely that it’s NOT sufficient just to let players paint their characters black without considering what sort of experience a black person would have in the world being portrayed. But yeah, I’m a regular racist troll.
As I’ve said in other discussions, I’m all for greater diversity of protagonists in games in general, and even more in favour of greater diversity among professional game developers. The point I’ve been making is that specifically about customisability, which I don’t think always makes sense. One of the things I like about games like The Walking Dead, for example, is that you are forced to inhabit a particular character (in this case, one who happened to be a different ethnicity to me). It’s part of the reason I read novels too - to inhabit a perspective that is different from my own, in ways that may be unexpected, challenging, and not entirely of my choosing.
None of which is to detract from the fact that it must be pretty annoying to be a black person in a world where games almost always ask you to inhabit a white perspective. To my mind the problem is always being asked to do this, not sometimes being asked to.
Don’t you get tired of all or nothing arguments?
Does it make you wonder why you do it?
1 Like
I’m sorry, but it doesn’t count as an answer, more like evasive maneuvers. You could have simply answered my question and we would have had a discussion. I am new here, please explain what you are arguing for. I asked nicely and I am willing to listen.
We agree that it’s easy to be inclusive.
We disagree whether being inclusive has any value.
2 Likes
I think all or nothing is descriptive enough for you even if you are new.
Now look at what I wrote, is it in fact all or nothing? Where did I even begin to suggest that anything be obligatory in the post you responded to?
I didn’t. Anywhere.
So if you want a discussion, don’t begin with a re-characterization of my statement as an all or nothing argument that you don’t agree with, and that I didn’t make.
I’ve already made that exact point about Geralt. To you.
1 Like
Please explain how it would detract from your enjoyment if there were an option --other people-- could exercise to do exactly that?
Problem lies in your definition of ‘inclusive’ - it excludes other cultures, those without black-white problems but with other issues. For Americans ‘inclusivness’ means black protagonists. For others it is more complicated - as I explained in some other post, for the world of Witcher it means maybe allusions to genocide and discrimination, but not discrimination based on skin colour. By insisting on black character in this particular game you are reducing the impact of other cultural references. For the people in Poland, changing the race of the Witcher would be the serious laughing matter, he is so rooted in the popular culture. The developer would be booed for sure. Yet you still insist on it - that means you have no respect for other cultures and cannot think of them as equal. You seem like only your racial problems are important.
I’m sorry, I cannot find your initial post where you formulate your stance on this topic. Can you point me to it? And I was not trying to create a straw-man, really. I sort of assumed that if you are of opinion that developer should have free choice in allowing customisation, you wouldn’t be arguing as you did. Well, if it should be left to their discretion - so be it, end of the story, they did nothing wrong, only exercised they right. So please re-state what you said, for me - simple copy-paste would be fine. Thanks in advance.
It’s clearly there. If you can’t find it I don’t see how copy-pasting all of my posts could possibly help you.
But, since you are here.
Please explain how the inclusion of an option to let --someone else-- play a different skin tone would detract from --your-- enjoyment playing the game with the default skin tone.
Just. Do. That.
It wouldn’t. I’m not against it. There is nothing wrong with it. I personally have nothing against playing as a black person (and I do so), yet I understand the sensitivity of this for someone over the pond. For me it is no issue.
Yet, my argument is different - that the option to change the skin colour should not be obligatory in every game. Certain games are story-driven, and you are presented with a pre-set hero, with some background. And it is the case with Witcher - because he has a story to prove it, even though it may be not obvious at the first glance (I’m not talking about ‘Slavic mythology’, only that for 20 years he was portrayed as an albino, through books, comics and games).
So, here is my question - should we REQUIRE developers to include this option? I think that in the case of Witcher it would create a little worse game experience. For me it is not a discussion about racial thing, but about forcing foreign developers to include design options that are strange for them and which would be distracting for the story, in theiR opinon of course. So - are thay allowed to create their own hero as they wish or not?
I will provide some examples:
Batman, Spiderman, Superman - let’s say that WB makes open-world game, almost RPG - and allows full character customisation - and we can have little Chinese guy flying with red cape, saving lives. Does it offend someone? Not me. Yet it should be left to developers discretion to turn off/restrict this option - for the sake of immersion, in order to not make the main character look stupid, as people have some established expectation of him.
Final Fantasy - should it be reqired in the new FF7 remake to have full customisation, so we can create black Tifa and white Barret?
You missed the mark entirely except for your fist sentence: “It wouldn’t”
That’s the end of the road. It would not affect you. Anything else is you interfering with someone else.
Your question, which you are the first to ask outside of a bastardization of someone’s REQUEST that any option be added or considered, is moot because no one is arguing that it should be required. Literally No One. Excepting of course, the people who are pretending that someone is. In that case the person is arguing by proxy in order to have someone to argue against. In most cases we simply call that “being stupid”.
So, are you arguing by proxy? Creating the myth that someone is demanding something be obligatory so that you can have something to rail against? According to you, you are.
No one can force devs to do this thing you are making up. If the market will favour them, that is not force. If fans will favour them, that is not force.
You can’t argue (legitimately) against things that don’t exist in order to have your way with things that do.
2 Likes
Except that you did (I found your previous post):
My understanding of you previous post is that you call developer who don’t include PoC quote racist end of quote. That qualifies as an insult, so you clearly think that they are in the wrong. If you call the ones who do not include PoC stupid it is clear that you demand them to be included everywhere. Then you in later posts extended this argument, and also call for the customisation option. And I say that it should be left entirely to the creators discretion, because there are countries who don’t have any black-white issues so they don’t have any incentive to include PoC in their games. Any thoughts?
Pssh, All people have racially constrained viewpoints. That isn’t an insult anymore than than it would be if I called you a bipedal hominid. You lose 10 points.
Pretending that “actively racist” isn’t the last in a list of --possible-- reasons that a developer might not be aware that a lack of inclusion is often perceived as exclusion earns you a point deduction of 10 points.
For removing the context of the previous post to which this is a reply (it is an explanation of someone else’s post for another person) you have 10 more points deducted.
I’ll be happy to give 10 of your points back if you are merely confused by that content or context because you are ESL or some other good reason for misunderstanding, but otherwise the deductions stay.
Re-read your own sentences (those words inside the brackets), please, you called them names and try to backpedal.
That stands true - but only in USA. Not including PoC in your game is called in Poland ‘describing the everyday reality of your country’ Almost nothing is said about PoC in Poland. That’s why I claim that ‘racism by exclusion’ accusation would not stand here.
Eeee, what context? I mean you actually didn’t meant to say what you said? I’m little confused. Were you mocking the other guy?
I’m confused, not only because of me being ESL (if you had doubts as if I am foreigner, then it is actual compliment for me - thanks) - so why don’t you explain your thoughts to me - it is easy to criticise the other guy while not contributing to the discussion.
FINALLY, even if we agree that there was misunderstanding (I think not, but I give benefit of doubt), please, would you share your thoughts and answer my one question? Aren’t those pesky Polish developers allowed to have almost all-white game or not. I am not arguing for all the games, only for this one. Please, Yes or No
The words in the (brackets)? Are Examples. You’re free to apply any of those, or any other you can come up with on your own, because the words that matter are just before the brackets, my words, --whatever reason—. By the way those are descriptives not names.
If you read the threads in order you would see that the post you took that from is a summation of another person’s post for purposes of clarification. That’s context.
If you can’t answer that for yourself, you should seek help. Because you are still the only person arguing that they shouldn’t be allowed, you’re arguing it by proxy so that you can pretend to argue against it.
No one has tried to require anything of the devs. You’re making that up.
2 Likes
Oh, jeez… Is it a new rule? That words inside brackets don’t matter? Meanwhile, in real life, if you provide only negative examples it is a statements in itself. Look here:
Somebody with whom I recently argued may for whatever reason (locked in a cellar, lazy, stupid, insensitive, actively racist or simply being poorly educated) harbours a different opinion. What do you think I make of you? But remember, word in brackets doesn’t count because I added ‘for whatever reason’ 
And ‘calling sb names’ is fairy common idiom (here: http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/call+names).
So, to be clear - you clarified and explained someones post, but you don’t agree with it? Yes?
As for the last one - I know my answer, was waiting for yours. Funny thing though - you said 2d ago that gamedevs ‘…aren’t developing for the Polish market anymore […] They’ll need to adapt.’ …and today: ‘No one has tried to require anything of the devs.’
Somebody hijacked you account, I presume? Which one is the real you?
1 Like
