Game not selling well? Find a tweet from a nobody talking about your shitty game being “woke.” Sensationalize it, position yourself as a bastion fighting against the hordes, imply that only by purchasing the failing game can the average liberal “fight back.”
Profit.
Who are these fucking complete garbage people who can conceive of a world where there are elves, dwarves, Qunari and darkspawn, but trans people are a bridge too far?
I have no idea what woke even means anymore. It seems to mean “social awareness”. Black lives matters kind of a thing. Equal rights for trans people too of course. That doesn’t mean that everyone should support games being forced into having all genders, or races, or include trans people. Or all books or movies should be forced to have those things.
If you create something, it’s up to you how you want that to be. You are the artist.
This is not equal to hating trans people, and anyone with some iq points realizes this. We can’t turn every creation into a vehicle for trans rights.
There’s some trans people in media
Mfw
Literally 1984
And when the artists chooses to include all genders, or races, or trans people; what would you call the effort to force the artists from removing this from their art?
I didn’t know that was what was happening here. Did the article say that?
That is what the culture war is. The effort to create an environment where publishers and artists have a harder time including aspects labeled “woke” because of a loud minority will harass the people involved, review bomb the products, dominate the discourse with bad faith arguments, and generally minimize the potential enjoyment of anyone who is the intended audience. This is what forcing an agenda upon artists looks like.
I think I’m on the other side - I think it’s way too much woke agenda in a lot of popular TV shows we watch. Disney competely wrecked a lot of shows because they kept pushing in gender/race related things that felt competely out of place.
I couldn’t even watch the acolyte. They wrecked it competely. Many web pages have described what’s wrong with it so won’t repeat that here, but hopefully you already know what I mean.
If you don’t like something, that’s fine. They made the product they want, they’re free to do that, and you’re free to not like it.
Just know that art has always driven social discussion, and it’s always been met with heavy social opposition, just usually in the form of outright censorship. So historically artists had to be subtle in order to be critical without being censored. In order to see more edgy stuff you had to go to small, barely funded art house shows.
But then the internet happened, and suddenly artists weren’t beholden to a small number of elite entertainment corporations. Art containing more openly progressive ideas can now be shared directly with the masses, the masses are now preferring progressive ideals more than ever before, and naturally corporations making entertainment products now have a financial incentive to cater to that demographic (often called “virtue signaling”). Today you see a mix of corporate pandering and actual art, even within the development teams of a mainstream product like Dragon Age or Disney. Some messaging feels honest, others feel ham fisted because it’s pride month.
But the censorship of the pre-internet days existed for a reason. A lot of people feel uncomfortable seeing things that challenge their status quo. People tend to seek comfort, and they just want their entertainment to leave them be. But now that corporate censors are less of a barrier, and now that progressive ideals are proliferating, the people themselves are backlashing. They say things like, “it’s way too much woke agenda, I’m tired of it. I want to watch a show without having the story be about woke issues.” I think that’s also normal.
I think the backlash is two fold: On the one hand, real art challenges the viewer, which can be exhausting when you just want to be entertained before you get a few hours of sleep and go back to work in the morning. But on the other hand, you do have what offen feels like a disengenuous layer of progressive pandering coming from corporations that you never saw before. And no one likes being pandered to, let alone not being pandered to.
I think this corporate pandering towards progressive ideals is new, the terms we use to describe everything are definitely new, but the tendency for art to expose people to progressive ideals and the tendency for the masses to be conservative and resist change are as old as humanity. And I view the two as a social evolutionary yin and yang, keeping each other in check.
I have never met a trans person and I’ve only known about 3 gay people personaly… so why are they in every source of media?
I have never met a trans person
As far as you know
Yeah good point
I thought I’d never meet a trans person and very few gay people in the agricultural college I attended when I went back to college. Turned out every damn one of the friends I made was somewhere on the LGBTQ spectrum. So as the other person said “as far as you know”
Acceptance of gay and trans rights has allowed so many people to realize they’re not so straight or not so cisgender and that’s wonderful. People are finally finding the freedom to be who they are!
I support their rights, they are people, the genitals only mader in bed. I just don’t want aliens in the far future watching our shows and thinking “god damn, it was femboy paradies!”
I just don’t want aliens in the far future watching our shows and thinking “god damn, it was femboy paradies!”
This is so hyperbolic I have to wonder where this thinking comes from?
I used to think that. But the amount of people hiding it, or just coping, is probably higher than you think.
Like I live in a pretty small city with an average gay community, and all it took was one person coming out as trans for a bunch of others to go “oh you know what me too - let’s do this,” so now we have like a whole posse of trans men that I see at the gym all the time (with their gains and their cool names lol).
I’m not saying this is always the case by any stretch, but if someone is super butch or super femme, they might not be cis.
You have met trans people. It isn’t in every source of media. You are experiencing warped perceptions. Show this post to someone you trust.
Get out of here jerkface! /s
It’s part of an effort to normalize seeing it. I think it’s probably good, but it’s just a bit unrealistic sometimes and feels very forced. ':)
That doesn’t mean that everyone should support games being forced into having all genders, or races, or include trans people
The fuck are you talking about? No one is forcing anyone to “have all genders or races or include trans people”
I don’t think they meant literally. More in the sense that if you don’t include them you’re suddenly “anti-trans/gay/whatever”.
Who does this? I am only aware of far-right bros angrily making lists of games that have black and/or gay characters.
That’s the anti-woke propaganda the text you’re quoting is complaining about. If you listen to anyone right wing long enough this is what they’ll bring up eventually. it’s “fake news” basically – very dangerous fake news.
Perhaps you misunderstood the poster?
No he is misrepresenting what’s going on and telling on himself.
In what way? I don’t even know what “telling on himself” means. I’m just expression my opinion about this. Why is that so upsetting?
who
1984?
Social Media Person Destroys Troll In Epic “Clapback” - see details after two sets of ads below
I have one problem with this:
slams
… siiiiigh
Everybody get up, it’s time to slam now
We got a real jam goin’ down
Welcome to the Space Jam
can you explain?
It’s a very overused and absolutely terrible use of a word.
For two reasons:
- It has a predefined meaning, and if you read what the DA creators say, they’re not actually “slamming” it. While they’re pretty openly hostile - and for good reason - that’s a far cry from what someone “slamming” someone else or a quote would be.
- It’s inclusion in the headline is for sensationalism, which would not be needed as the “You’re an idiot!”-quote already does that. Or maybe it’s just surprising how desensitivized people on the net are nowadays.
To think it further, consider the whole headline had been slam-ified:
Dragon Age GOATs slam “woke” lollerz: “Cry moar!”
It’s included in headlines is because it’s a small word. At least historically. Now it’s just a holdover.
The best Dragon Age game is still Origins. They’ve had two sequels that haven’t matched the quality of the original. That’s what I would worry about. “Woke” had nothing to do with under-delivery.
Inquisition wasn’t quite as bad, I actually enjoyed it because it made an attempt to walk back some of the “streamlining” from 2, though obviously they both pale in comparison to Origins.
I was kind of hopeful they’d rediscovered their identity somewhat with Inquisition, but 4 looks like that hope was misplaced. They doubled down on abandoning the RPG in favor of the overly simplistic button masher with a smattering of RPG elements that are more or less meaningless.
This is the reality. EA, Ubisoft they both created masterpieces in the past. And they just got worse in every release with their beloved series. The reason is mostly nothing is simple anymore. People want simplicity, not bunch of launchers with additional accounts, always online single player games, tens of DLCs that were suppose to be in the main game.
Dragon Age’s drop in reputation had nothing to do with launchers, given many if not most players were on console.
“Simplicity” is arguably what killed it, because they had an excellent formula with Origins, and “simplified” it to the point it lost its identity as a true RPG.
Simplicity to access the content is important, but I’d argue just as important is they’ve tried to make the games simple and appealing to everyone, and they end up not really appealing to anyone. Make an interesting game for the people that want it. Don’t make a game no one wants.
It genuinely feels like the notion of a pure triple AAA RPG is slowly being torn down by publishers chasing the wide audience of action game fans who will ultimately not care that much for the end product.
Yep. Just look at Bioware. BG3 would have been theirs if they didn’t go the action game route. In the past they made BG and SWTOR, but then they made DA: Origins (not an action game, but moving that direction) and then Mass Effect. At that point they never went back from that direction. They’ve been successful most of the time, but I feel it can only last so long, because it isn’t really made for anyone anymore. I think we can see that now.
Jack of all trades, master of none.
I disagree. I preferred 2 and 3 to 1. Obviously YMMV and that’s fine
Aye, let’s agree to respect each other’s opinion. No matter how wrong yours might be.
(joking of course, I actually like 2 a lot despite how clearly unfinished and rushed it was, although I really really disliked 3 except for the romances and the character interactions)
I always enjoyed the story of 2. Origins and 3 both fall for the same story beats aka “You are the Chosen One. Only you can save the World.”
Origins, you are the last of the Grey Wardens in Felderen. Only you can reunite everyone to stop the Blight.
3, only you can close the rifts, reunite everyone, and stop the Big Bad guy.
In 2n Varic actively mocks that in the beginning. Hawke is portrayed as the Chosen One. When challenged, Varic admits that he made it up. Hawke is a nobody in beginning, only kicks start the mage and templar war because of the people that they associated started everything. Cough Anders Cough Hawke really just stumbles from adventure to adventure because of their companions.
It’s a story about unintended consequences and how small events can lead into big events.
2’s biggest failure was the over use of the same assets. The is cave/house/ruin is the same layout all the other cave/house/ruin. It was fine when it made narrative sense however that it is only for a minority of the time.
It’s always weird to me when people talk about video games as if story is the single most important aspect.
Personally I think 2’s biggest folly was abandoning the deep RPG in favor of overly-simplistic hack and slash. A mistake 3 somewhat attempted to correct, and for that, I’ll take its weaker story because I enjoy playing it much more. And if course 1 blows them both out of the water in terms of RPG gameplay.
I liked Varic in 2 but that’s about it. The asset recycling was absolutely mad.
my soul brother.
Really what did you prefer, character, worldbuilding, level design, graphics? I’m genuinely curious. I personally loved Varic in the later games.
Yeah I love the second one also. Liked the characters better, I like the contained story, combat was more fun I thought, Etc…
combat was more fun I thought,
And this is the problem. The original game was made for people into RPGs (technically Real Time with Pause RPG).
The sequels gave a middle finger to those people by chasing simplistic, action focused combat with minimal RPG aspects. Hence why people despise them.
Oh yes, I played a mage in both and the difference was startling. In the first part you have immensly powerful spells, that could also backfire hard because the game had friendly fire. At high levels you could wipe everything on the screen, including your party. In the second, friendly fire was gone so you could blast away and suddenly you spun around like a kung-fu master for some reason.
Wasn’t it dragon age 2 where the level design got super repetitive though? It felt like they kept reusing the same exact level design in ways that didn’t really make sense.
Yes, 2 had a lot of re-used locations. Some of them did make sense, as the story was almost entirely set within a single city, so certain locations are bound to pop up multiple times, especially as the game takes place over a decade or so.
But the real reason, 2 was developed and rushed out the door in like a year or something? It was a ridiculously short amount of time to develop a sequel to a game as big as DA:O. Unsurprisingly, this led to a LOT of re used assets and locations.
But though it obviously had failings, I, like some others, would probably put DA2 as the high point for the series telling really character driven stories with the most compelling cast of characters.
I’ve heard that, and it’s reasonable however I found the level design in the first one could be a little repetitive as well so I thought some of the criticism was somewhat unwarranted.
Yep Varic was the sole redeeming quality of a bad game.
Who will be idiot if the game flops?
Who will be the idiot if the game doesn’t?
