This whole hullabaloo will swirl into pedantry and shrill extremism before washing away in the fall's big line-ups, solving nothing, annoying many.
Colin Moriarty writes:
"Don’t get me wrong; you can be offended by anything you want. You can let other people’s words, deeds and art get to you however you deem fit. But the second you start confusing your own subjective notion of good taste with what that means for everyone else and project your own offended posture on the rest of us, you’ve crossed the line."
Kate Cox answers:
"In the end, Moriarty asks: "When are we going to acknowledge that this mentality is destructive? When are we going to come to terms with the fact that by strangling creativity because of abstract notions of being offended and hurt feelings, we are doing a major disservice not only to ourselves, but to the people who want to give us new stories full of new ideas?"
The answer is: never, because that's not the case. To stifle criticism is no better than to stifle creativity. A work needs to stand on its own, and either to defend itself, or to fail. To ignore valid offense, and to insist that audience feelings don't matter, is to do a major disservice not only to ourselves, but to the makers who want to give us new stories full of new ideas. To leave old, hackneyed, dated ideas unchallenged is to prevent us from getting new stories full of new ideas. To accept whatever we are handed without challenge, without thought, and without critique is to ensure we will never get new stories full of new ideas."
The way i read it. What Colin is trying to say, is that the few projecting their idea of what is ethical on to the masses, not by engaging in constructive criticism but by trying project their own sense of good taste onto everyone elses and disguising it as some sort of sensus communis, is what is strangling creativity by forcing self censorship on developers and scaring the moneyhats, as with konami and Six days in Fallujah.
I don't disagree with Kate's response i just don't think it applies to the original article when read as a whole, instead of select statements.
Thereby not stating that Colins article is bulletproof or above criticism, i just think any criticism on what is not the heart of the matter is pedantic and superfluous. Unless you're his teacher trying to make him focus on his subject.
-Entirely ironic that i should harp on minutiae i know, but there you go.