Editorial: Why We Write: On Game Critique, Influence, and Reach

@wolfhazard: I don't know, but if there was ever proof that From Software is a pretty cool company, that's it.

You're god damn right. Forever, I would hope.

You know, that is a rather interesting point. For all of the criticism I see over how certain games portray women or diversity, I don't think I have ever seen an article criticizing Nintendo for not being more socially progressive. Throughout the years the stories have routinely involved the white male protagonists on a quest to save the vulnerable princess who has once again found herself in need of rescue.

This is a well written and rational response and I can actually get on board with most of it. Unlike the kotaku piece, this wasn't what I was talking about when I pointed out that many people whine about these issues without actually doing anything to remedy them. In my view, game developers have absolutely no duty to instill diversity in games just as they have no duty at all to create RPGs or FPS or any other type of game. Game development is a business. They have every right to make whatever the hell they think will make money as long as they aren't deceiving their customers. Therefore, if you want something made that isn't otherwise being made, all you can do is (a) help to make it yourself (whether that be through development or funding or whatever) or (b) try to incentivize others to make it by demonstrating that a market exists for it. Writing critical articles about the witcher does neither.

@excast: Petition to get DMXgoomba in the next mario game.

This is a well written and rational response and I can actually get on board with most of it. Unlike the kotaku piece, this wasn't what I was talking about when I pointed out that many people whine about these issues without actually doing anything to remedy them. In my view, game developers have absolutely no duty to instill diversity in games just as they have no duty at all to create RPGs or FPS or any other type of game. Game development is a business. They have every right to make whatever the hell they think will make money as long as they aren't deceiving their customers. Therefore, if you want something made that isn't otherwise being made, all you can do is (a) help to make it yourself (whether that be through development or funding or whatever) or (b) try to incentivize others to make it by demonstrating that a market exists for it. Writing articles about games that are already released and criticizing their devs for not altering their creative vision in order to pander to certain ethnic groups, genders, sexual orientations or whatever else achieves neither.

Man...social justice and related topics continues to be an unexpectedly divisive topic on Giant Bomb. News at 11!

Excellent article, Austin, and I hope to see more like it!

@excast: I believe Nintendo came under a considerable amount of fire for its exclusion of gay relationships in Tamodatchi Life just last year--and I've seen regular criticism over Zelda's treatment in her own series (the last Metroid came under fire for its treatment of Samus as well, but since that was created by Team Ninja I guess you could argue it doesn't really count). Criticism of this sort of thing is only recently (like in the last few years, I'd say) becoming more mainstream, so I'm sure we'll see similar criticism build as more people interrogate games of the past.

Thanks for writing this, Austin. As a weird gaming nerd myself, I appreciate it. I think I'm going to love going on the deep dives into this complicated gaming culture with you. I'm glad the GB guys picked you up. Keep up the good writing, Dr. Games. :)

Damn. This thing is like 3.5k words. You write so damn fast!

Fantastic work Austin. I cannot get enough of this sort of writing. Thanks.

The following will be the best 2 hours of your life.

Is this really a thing that needed to be analyzed? Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding this article?

Yes, a critic cannot force a developer to do anything. Instead, they use whatever amount of 'power' they do have to try and appeal to the developer. Doen't matter how little that influence is. Through writing, Twitter, video, whatever. And that's it pretty much. Person A wants change X to happen, whereas person B was fine with situation Y. There's a conflict of interest here, resulting in arguments.

Certain points of view are simply not represented that much in games media, or even frowned upon. This increases tension even more. You can't ask for X without being called a bigot, sexist or racist, so instead people should be prevented from talking about Y.

That's how we got in this mess in the first place, if you ask me.

@excast: I'd just like to add a thought to what @ford_dent wrote and say I think part of the reason you see that criticism less frequently applied to Mario games is that Mario games feature the absolute minimum of characterization. It's a lot more jarring to not see yourself represented in a world that (despite containing dragons and whatnot) in many ways resembles the real one than in as abstract a universe as the one Mario inhabits.

I think social criticism sits closer to "forcing" on the spectrum since it implies that the game is actually harmful to society. "Destiny needs more content" doesn't come with that sort of implication.

@turambar: Welp, there go my evening plans.

Good article. I think you give other games writers and publications far too much credit though.

@ford_dent: I think is a valid criticism with Tomadachi Life as is a light hearted live simulation so is weird that doesn't include a gay option. Mind you, there were people outright aggresive with Nintendo (thought their PR didn't help at times) but I felt it was a valid opinion (and many people admitted that were okay with the promise in taking on account in the next Tomadachi Game, as I heard actually sold well)

Austin just warranted his whole year's salary with this editorial. I like the new academic flair that he brings to the site.

Did you read the rhetoric he quoted? I've been hearing the same for years. Where somehow critiquing games meant that people wanted them banned.

@turambar: i think saying its gonna be the best two hours of your life is a bit much, but its entertaining for sure. dont know if i could stick with it for the whole two hours tho, it gets old kinda quick.

News Editor, edit thyself

I often get very irritated at the notion that critics aren't allowed to say things about certain things in games. People have been pointing to Polygon for their Bayonetta 2 and Witcher 3 reviews as somehow a sign that things are unethical. That their own points of view are on social issues are inadmissible and should be ignored where instead a focus on the games mechanics should be the focus of the review.

Now, this is a very troubling idea. As an extreme example, both Triumph of the Will and the Birth of a nation are technically great films. They revolutionised uses of cinematography and editing and are still explored heavily in film theory as being revolutionary, technically. But I would find it very disturbing if someone gave these films good reviews without mentioning that the subject matter they both espouse are awful.

Now Witcher 3 isn't awful, but you can't ignore your moral compass if something goes against it. It would be disingenuous of the review both for himself, and his audience if he didn't allow that to effect his review.

Another reason these types of articles aren't going to force devs to do anything is that they know that most people that actually buy and play games don't care at all about this stuff.

The big publishers/devs have all the data and see what the market actually wants. They see that even after all the long articles and arguing about sexism and wanting more female protagonists, Bayonetta 2 still came out and sold like complete garbage, even with great reviews.

It's cool that some people (mostly games writers) are passionate about these things, but most of the audience still just want to hear if the game is fun and what mechanics are in it. Not your ideas for new characters that should've been a different race or gender or whatever.

@hednik4am: I absolutely thought the same thing during his first Beastcast appearance. Def not a bad thing.

I think it's important to point out that criticism itself exists on the free market. Giant Bomb, for example, is only as "influential" as the size of its audience allows it to be. An review can only effect game sales if people freely and actively make the decision to listen to it.

I wonder if this is true.

I'm not in a position to know much about market research into the gaming industry, but I do know TV (US TV, at least). On American television, there has been a long-running dearth of shows that don't feature predominantly white casts. Black-majority cast shows had taken a big dive since the eighties and nineties, and god forbid you were a Latino or Asian actor, because there were seriously slim pickings out there. And the reason for those conditions was pretty much what you stated above - the prevailing wisdom was that people wanted shows about white people, and that was just good business.

But recently, a funny thing has been happening, and that trend has shifted. In the past couple years, the networks have realized that they are leaving markets untapped, and shows with non-white casts have been launching. And there's been a resounding response in the numbers. Shows like Blackish, Empire, and How to Get Away with Murder have been bringing in huge numbers. And Fresh Off the Boat, which is an ABC sitcom about an Asian family, has become one of the most successful shows on television in its first season - and there hasn't been a TV show about an Asian family in the US since the 90s.

I know you can't make a 1:1 comparison between the industries, but... the funny thing about prevailing wisdom is that sometimes it can perpetuate itself without checking back in with reality to make sure it's still true. I wouldn't be so dismissive.

Sidebar: Bayonetta 2, it could be argued, is not what most of the people decrying portrayals of women in gaming would consider a positive example.

Isn't that a confirmation bias? If ever in a blue moon we get a game featuring a female protagonist and it doesn't sell according to "market-research"/over-inflated projected sales figures, and the publishers/devs chalk that up to solely or largely based on the gender of the main character, then of course male leads (the abundance of most games) will be perceived as the "better" choice.

Remember: we live in a world were Tomb Raider selling 8.5 million copies was a "disappointment."

Really, really enjoyed this. Thanks for writing this article; I am looking forward to reading more of your work!

It's really cool that Austin is doing such back and forth with the community on things like this.

I can't read 400 comments but I hope everyone gave him the same mutual respect he did in his responses

http://kotaku.com/shigeru-miyamoto-and-the-damsel-in-distress-520259897

Maybe it's only been in recent times, but Nintendo has been criticized for their portrayals of underrepresented groups. And just because you are not currently criticizing one thing (the Mario series) doesn't preclude you from criticizing another (Witcher 3).

EDIT: Also, let's not even get started about Super Princess Peach...

@antikyth3ra: Not the entire game - ELEMENTS of the game. Try not to think of it from such a negative perspective. There seems to be this fear that the second something like The Witcher 3 is criticized, it somehow invalidates the praise it has gotten. This is not so. These critics are not saying "this game shouldn't have been made," they're saying "This game could be even better."

Criticism helps great art become GREATER, it doesn't cut it down.

This was a great read. As someone who shies away from discourse on the internet due to a bushel of reasons, It's great to see an article like this that actually makes me feel welcome to open my mind and figure out what I want to say.

Hope y'all have a nice E3.

Tomb Raider is basically the biggest name there is to test that, and even with a big budget and marketing push it pretty much sold on 3 platforms what Uncharted does just on one system. And then the port to ps4/xone sold really poorly. They don't seem to have all that much confidence in the new one either because they took MS's money to make it a timed exclusive for the next gen system with the lowest install base instead of thinking it would make a lot of money on it's own on all the systems.

Stellar article, Austin.

#fuckyeahaustinwalker

You're a fucking wizard with words. Great read, Austin and totally agree with you here. If more game critics wrote about these subjects about half as good as you do, I'm sure there would be a lot less of a backlash from that other point of view. I love video-games and so I welcome these sorts of critiques. I don't see how anyone who seriously enjoys them would have any trouble trying to tackle these subjects. It will only elevate this industry into another whole level.

I want to frame this quote on a wall.

Real talk: I'm never kidding when I say that this stuff is complicated. Trying to unwrap this stuff is fucking brutal. And because issues like racism are systemic and cultural (and more than just some bad, violent men in white hoods), it's difficult to tackle them. The best we can do is address them honestly, actually engage with the tough stuff, and resist the urge to boil things down into simple binaries. Sometimes that means repeating ourselves, again and again: “No, I don’t think CD Projekt Red is racist; Yes, I still wish there were some people of color in the game. Yes, I still like The Witcher 3 a lot. No, those three statements do not contradict each other.”

Hot DAMN! This guy knows how to write! Bravo :D

I intend to post something a little more substantial when my thoughts coalesce and I have more time, but I just wanted to pop in and say that I got a lot out of this piece. Cheers Austin!

Your influence is more than what you think it is. Anyone who parrots what you say to someone else is expanding your influence, your ideas. As the idea spreads so does the pressure on whom it was targeted. You aren't forcing anything but the pressure is there and someone is feeling it.

What an excellent article- I'm so glad to see this on the site, it's a topic that was in sore need of being acknowledged and dissected. I've been thoroughly enjoying what you've been bringing to the site Austin, keep up the fantastic work!

You were the perfect addition to GB, Austin. Thank You.

I think it's silly to get so hung up on the semantics of one word and write a 3.5k word article on it. I'm not sure how often people are even saying that journalists are "forcing" developers to do their will, but I know that I've read "You shouldn't try to force your culture on others' culture", which isn't trying to say that you are literally putting a gun to someone, but that you are making a suggestion that they should put one culture into another's, for no other reason than that it fits your culture and not theirs. "You" is not referring to journalists, but rather to the general person.

This reads to me as a long, dodgy way of trying to avoid the argument, and still come out like you're right, which I think is a big problem for most writers or bloggers in this space: They can't admit they're wrong, even just a little bit, which is the case here.

It really doesn't matter. It's one hundred percent good to be wrong. I am wrong all the time. And I apologize for it. And I learn. I get the prevailing sense from all these blogs and this article that it's just Austin coming up to say "I don't care; I'm right; you're wrong."

A good portion of us live in a North American bubble that gives us all this lovely privilege and influence we forget we have.

Wow, what a great read. Felt like I was back in school! Thanks for making me think about this subject and for joining GB. I hope Giant Bomb realizes that they have a real superstar on their staff!!

Criticism is the practice of judging the merits and faults of something (or somebody) in an intelligible (or articulate) way....

This article.

The Witcher 3 is an awesome open world RPG, it's still only a game and not representative of everyone's point of view. Even though it is sold around the world it cannot completely fulfil everyone's idea of the perfect story / graphics / tone / characters / world. Like all forms of media Films, Books, Music, etc most are created by an individual or group of people that imbue certain aspects of sociocultural perspective, which is most likely skewed to fit with what is thought to be the "norm". We are all different and there is no one way of seeing things around us. Having certain expectations, this gives us the need to praise or criticise when we are passionate about a subject. We want to inform others of what we feel is right / wrong.

For a game that is widely praised like the Witcher 3 it only demonstrates how expectations have shifted to focus from more than just "Am I enjoying the game?" to for example "Am I being represented in this world?". It wasn't long ago when games had little or no story in place to criticise. Now huge worlds are being created with characters that almost feel lifelike. The uncanny valley is used to describe our perception of what is real, which is difficult if we cannot fully connect with what we are presented with. It only takes a tiny amount of unfamiliarity to make an unreal experience felt especially in games. We all want them to be as realistic as possible even when in a fantasy setting. I believe it will take time, but we will get there, looking back at the evolution of games so much has changed already. I'm just glad the Witcher 3 and other similar titles are being released that push a lot of boundaries. Of course there is always room for improvement. Money is a big factor, but l hope that there will always be the passion to keep producing better games.

@antikyth3ra said:

This is an important distinction to keep in mind, I agree.

A magnificent perspective on an unquestionably volatile issue, Austin. I share your opinion on the nature of criticism being wishful and contemplative rather than 'forceful' or 'demanding'. We all do hope to influence people with our opinions, but not in any sort of malicious manner. More often than not, the games we engage in discussion on are the ones that affected us most, the ones that we engaged with so intensely that we can't not speak up. The points of contention are usually small splotches on a larger painting, ones we could overlook but choose not to because the beauty of the whole merits it.

Your points regarding the trade-off between reach and desired level of influence raise a tough problem: How do you promote--not demand--discussion around an important topic when the very nature of that topic is to be ignored and buried? The use of The Witcher in Polygon's article is understandable, if still a little mired in grey. Like the occasional mixed messaging of government- or company- sponsored initiatives, is it okay to take advantage of public focus to champion an admirable cause?

Awesome article, Austin. Reading your work is really inspiring and totally makes me want to write more!