Interesting article. I'm not sure I agree though. The Western world, especially America, has developed a questionable culture of self-victimization over the past handful of years. Being left out has become equivalent to racism (or other prejudice: sexism, homophobia, etc.), getting your feelings hurt equivalent to assault, and overall people just like to point their fingers and hunt for witches. Austin actually tweeted out a small portion of an article on that very point. Don't get me wrong, we have seen a sadly high number of incidents in the States recently where an individual or group has been attacked in some way and to some degree because of their race or other minority status, but it is important to distinguish an attack from a targeted attack.

For full disclosure I would like to say that I am a straight, white male in America and as such have not been victim to much prejudice in my life. While I do not believe that background colors my response to this article, it is only fair that it be read with that in mind.

For example, Austin failed to do distinguish the difference between these attacks when he says:

when those fans say “Why should they include a person of color?” it ends up sounding a lot like “I’m glad they didn’t include people of color. It was right of them not to. The game would be ruined otherwise.”

It is very irresponsible to equate defense of the lore of the game (and greater mythology) to active racism. I would turn that argument back around and propose that people responding in such a way are perhaps hypersensitive to the issue in a way that leads them to cry wolf before all facts and perspectives have been taken into account. While it is entirely possible such a response is in fact driven by racism, it is counterproductive to the conversation to make that the initial assumption.

According to the CIA's current report ("Polish 96.9%, Silesian 1.1%, German 0.2%, Ukrainian 0.1%, other and unspecified 1.7%") minorities "of color" are not even listed in their own category; they along with all other minorities of all colors and backgrounds not specified make up 1.7% of Poland. Now that's present day, after years and years of globalization and immigration has ostensibly taken place. According to the Witcher wikia timeline - the accuracy of which I can not attest to - the most modern event in the lore of the game takes place around the 1500s. That's a long time ago. How many people of European descent do you think had ever even seen a person "of color" in the 1500s? From the lore of the game (Zerrikania as Austin mentions) perhaps one could contrive some form of pseudo-statistic about the population of non-white NPCs you should allegedly encounter, but this leads to a host of other problems.

For one, money, the bane of any ideal. If CD Projekt Red was going to include non-white NPCs they would likely create an entirely new set of assets rather than simply shading the white NPCs a different color (because people would call that racist). They would need new voice recordings as these NPCs would be of a different ethnicity and culture in the lore and would likely not sound the same as the white NPCs (some people would even call that racist). The pool of non-white NPCs would need to be just as large as the white NPCs because surely the non-white people would be just as varied in appearance, dress, behavior, and voice as the white NPCs (otherwise that would be racist). And for what? To have maybe 1 in 100 NPCs (if we're generous) be non-white? In a perfect world that might be an optimal arrangement, but for a full scale release it simply isn't realistic to put that much input into so little output, in my opinion.

And even if the money did work out and they could add some diversity to the game, what then? What if the 1 minority in the village is dice-rolled to be a drunk in the pub? People will be outraged at such "racist" characterization of a minority. What if the ethnic culture of these people (according to the lore of the story world) is quirky or odd in a way that some people find offensive? It simply seems to me that no matter what CD Projekt Red did with this issue, they would have offended somebody. In my opinion, they took the best course of action they possibly could have in balancing the mythology of the game, the creation of a realistic world, and producing and viable product.

It is entirely possible that they could have diversified their world to reflect a more American/European melting pot of a society, but that would have compromised their artistic vision of portraying the mythology of their land, something that I as an enthusiast would not like to see.

Thank you Austin for writing this.

And whether its intentional or not, when those fans say “Why should they include a person of color?” it ends up sounding a lot like “I’m glad they didn’t include people of color. It was right of them not to. The game would be ruined otherwise.”

...

It all feels like a desire for “the good old days,” where things–race, countries, games–were simpler. But there were no good old days. There were just days before we knew better.

This is a hell of a strawman. You've created a scenario where any counter-argument is tinged with an accusation of outright or implicit racism, based on your gut feeling and nothing more, and imply it all comes from a place reminiscent of how old geezer conservatives pine for the '50s.

You've ended any possibility for debate before it even began by impugning the motives of anyone who might disagree. This is now an impossible discussion.

I understand the critique but given the depth of the game and how it handles culture and bigotry and a whole range of subjects (and like Austin says, it's based on a source material) I think Witcher is not something I have an issue with at all. I think the game does a great job representing bigotry and ignorance through the handling of the elf and dwarf races and also mages (hell even some of the monsters). They don't have different colored skin maybe but they represent ideas of bigotry and ignorance and the subject gets tackled in a different way. I've played 2 and 3 especially fiercely defending the rights of the oppressed.

Like I said I get it though. Dragon Age was really good about diversity in a way I appreciated but I love just about everything about the Witcher in how it manages to accurately reflect some of these cultural issues through fantasy. But this is based on a source material from a white culture that is reflective of that culture. If I was to play a game that came from and/or was a reflection of an African, Asian, or any other culture, I would expect a similar feel (and I hope we see that happen as games, especially the developers of them, diversify). Using fantasy tropes it touches on the right ideas to me.

And I personally don't appreciate the "if you have a different opinion you might be racist" dig. I know that can totally be the case but hate when that's the way someone labels the other side if you disagree. I don't agree with the post but I would never paint the other side in an unfairly negative way.

I think the reason it feels like when people say "why should they include people of colour" is because it sounds like an argument against including them. In a historical setting that's fair enough but it's a fantasy game, with lots of ins to include people of colour, as Austin pointed out. And people of colour clearly would like some representation in the world, and seemingly should exist in it, so theres sort of no reason not to include them - unless the person would just prefer to not have people of colour in the game, I guess, even though there seems like a good reason to have them in.

@oldirtybearon: How about this... they have a whole race of other people they COULD be including, Zerrikanians, because The Witcher games are written independently of the previous fiction. They could have people from those other areas show up, and there's plenty of justification for it.

They talk in the game about how wars can make people rich, and you're also talking about a war large enough to have a significant impact on the ability of a city like Novigrad to fend for itself. Novigrad is characterized as a free city, and a center of culture and travel. The city houses, Nilfgaardians, Redanians, Skelligers, doplers, sorcerers and sorceresses, elves, dwarves... what reason would there be for no one, not a single soul, from Zerrikania to show up?

These territories are very clearly open to trading with them, so why wouldn't there be traders there? Dock hands? Sailors on boats that would come and go from all over the world? You expect me to believe no northerners picked up Zerrikanian crew while trading with them? No mercenaries looking to make a buck off working for people like Djkstra, Cleaver, or The King of Beggars - or hell, even Roche's resistance?

All of these are sound reasons for non-token racial representation, people with their own cultures, to be showing up in at the very least Novigrad, if not greater Temeria .

The Banner Saga is obviously the most racist game of last year, I mean, they really ought to have shoehorned in some fantasy Arabs in there to give it some diversity.

Okay I won't be so biting, but that's what this complaint sounds like to me. Yes, it's true that games should be more diverse, but I think it's absurd to demand that every game be fully diverse and have all sorts of races and stuff. What if I made a game set in historical Iceland in the 9th century? In a boy's boarding school in rural 19th century England? In a fantasy version of either? There's nothing racist or wrong about setting games in times or places which are themselves not diverse (or fantasy versions of those times and places). I wouldn't get mad if a game set in ancient medieval Cambodia or a fantasy analogue didn't include white people. We shouldn't have to shoehorn in different races and cultures into our games to fill diversity quotas if it makes for a less authentic feeling rendition of the time period/place or doesn't fit in with the theme of the fantasy world.

Yes, the world of the Witcher has demons, elves and shit, so we can accept some amount of deviation from the history it's based on, but if they decided to have Geralt get in a Ferrari and drive around it's not unreasonable to say that it breaks one's suspension of disbelief. Some unrealistic things are believable and others aren't and that's okay. (And I'll just say that if the developers chose to include Ferraris that would be okay I guess, if that's their vision of the world, but it also wouldn't be wrong for them not to include them, just like it wouldn't be wrong for them not to include a bunch of black characters)

It's true that while Medieval Europe did have some contact with nonwhite people, it was not very common and only really in certain areas. In the north and east it would be exceedingly rare to encounter nonwhite people. Poland may be 96% white today, back then it was certainly much more.

I think a much better way to get cultural or ethnic diversity in games would be not to demand that every game have multiple races and cultures represented, but to try to get multiple races and cultures represented in games in general. Make more games set in other cultures, or places inhabited by nonwhites, rather than demanding that those things be included in all games even when they seem very out of place.

for my brief time with it, it seems like the game’s political backdrop is meant to engage with issues of national and ethnic assimilation, coercion, and hierarchy. I’d could see an argument that the southern empire of Nilfgaard could stand in for either the powers of Western Europe or of Russia (or both) shoving their way into the region. The series’ handling of elves and dwarves follows the tropish model of treating them as stand-ins for ethnic minorities.

Honestly, these themes really struck me as I'm from Europe. I understand these issues are treated differently in other parts of the world but going through the election in the UK recently a lot of the issues were about people from other countries coming over and how they're treated. After the election it's been a lot of talk about maybe trying to get free movement toned down and limited in the EU, so I didn't see the elves and dwarves as stand-ins for other races but a reflection of real world politics in the region currently. But that was just my interpretation.

That being said I wouldn't have minded if other actual races were included and I think it's right that people point this out, but I do feel it's unfair to pile on thinly veiled accusations of racism to the developer like I've seen some places doing. I dunno, I think issues of race and culture are difficult topics to discuss online where there's no face to face but hopefully we're getting there.

Good points here, Austin.

@jman240: Because Nilfgaard and fuck-off sized Mountains lie between Zerrikania and the Northern Kingdoms. That's the in context, in fiction answer. Zerrikania more or less wants nothing to do with the Northern Kingdoms as the Nordlings are seen as barbaric and a waste of time. As for the out of context, real life answer? I have no idea why Sapkowski didn't include more Zerrikanians in his stories. I have no idea why Geralt never went to Zerrikania, or why so few wound up in the ass end of nowhere (the Northern Kingdoms).

I imagine it has something to do with focusing on stories he wanted to write, about things he knew about, and themes he wanted to explore. Just a hunch, however.

It was such a nice piece until the end. Oh, and the whole "calling slavs white" thing.

@austin_walker Thanks for this. It's inspiring to see that, even in a sliver of free time, you can write something this probing and thoughtful.

I do feel conflicted about the push for racial diversity in this specific case, however. To paraphrase my thoughts from another thread...

I have many dream games that I hope to be fortunate enough to make some day. One is a version of the Popol Vuh, the Maya creation myth and fight of the Hero Twins to outsmart the demons in hell. Another is an exploration of Australian Aboriginal dreamtime myths.

Those games would have no racial diversity at all. They represent the cultures that they came from, and would be a celebration of those peoples specifically. So throwing some Europeans in for the sake of diversity would be, to me, unthinkable. The world of The Witcher is very similar.

The only reason it is a "problem" is in relation to other games as a whole. There is an undeniable lack of racial diversity in games overall, so I understand the reaction in seeing The Witcher 3 as just another "white people game". But it's only viewed as that through the lens of unequal representation in other games.

In a better world where AAA games eagerly feature every type of human imaginable as a player character, no one would bat an eye at a game derived from European myths, featuring mostly European characters. It would be welcomed as a look into a fictional yes, but still historically inspired celebration of the Slavic culture. A unique group of marginalized humans in the world, that just happened to have pale skin.

And of course, we are not in that better world, so I understand that it's potentially disingenuous to even discuss that idea. But should it truly be the duty of every developer to fill a race quota, especially if their game at least somewhat understandably lacks it? Are our efforts not better spent in criticising games set in a context that blatantly suffers from its their of representation (Watch Dogs, etc.)?

Supporting the blanket double standard that Moosa sets up in his article isn't pushing more devs to move away from their myopic representation of race. It's limiting it, by seeing any game solely by the color of the character's skin, rather than the ethnicity they may represent.

Also, in saying...

And whether its intentional or not, when those fans say “Why should they include a person of color?” it ends up sounding a lot like “I’m glad they didn’t include people of color. It was right of them not to. The game would be ruined otherwise.”

It honestly makes me deeply uncomfortable to even have this conversation. I really do appreciate your honesty here, and I think that is indeed what many people see as the subtext of even what I wrote above. But it works to destroy any potential progress or greater understanding when a dialog gets swept away as, "Those people are probably just hiding their racism. Pay them no mind."

Holy shit am I a bad person to not realize everyone is white in the game until reading this? It had never occurred to me before now.

I feel like this whole discussion is being directed by such an "american" point of view. As a European, and partly a student of literature (affected greatly by mythology), I’m so happy to see Slavic mythology in AAA game. Its super uncommon and therefore interesting to me. Because i look at it as a minority culture along with lets say germanic, gaelic, nordic one and so on... And that feels very important already to me.

As to the question "Would adding PoC ruin the game?" I feel like if that would happen there are only 2 outcomes. They dont address the racism based on color of skin at all (since they have their own metaphors for it) and they get scrutinezed for it. Or they address it and add a whole another (super) complicated level that doesnt have a source anywhere and adds superficial layer that would hurt the game in the end.

@oldirtybearon: The books aren't the game and the games aren't the books and the author has said as much. Plenty of things were changed from the books for the sake of making a good game so this adherence to stick purely to the source material on only this specific issue comes off as disenenous.

And again one of the main bad guys from the first game is Zerrikanian and that's completely not in the books. So it's not like they haven't already done it in the series

Hey Austin, really good write-up, and I think that it helped me solidify my thoughts.

Having read a few articles about the issue with Witcher 3, I truly agree that it's a little weird that there aren't even a couple people of color somewhere in there. I don't think CDPR deserves to be raked over the coals for it, because it probably wasn't malicious. But I definitely think it's fair to be disappointed, and to point it out to them, and hope that they do better in the future with an increased awareness.

Right on.

My view on this is that they could've included PoC into the game. The option is there in the source material. The argument of "don't add diversity for diversity's sake" that has been thrown around a lot is absurd to me, and is absolutely pointless. I don't think the dev did anything malicious by not including more diversity, but I think it's fair to be disappointed and state why and hope that the dev takes it into consideration.

It's good that we began this discussion with the implication that not falling in line with the outrage makes you a conservative reactionary who wants the world to return to the 1950s. That's called poisoning the well, making sure no one can even dispute you without inviting bullshit character assumptions. You would never make these arguments to a stranger's face because you know exactly what you're implying, and you would know immediately these people are not the strawmen you've set them up as. The funnier part is this fighting the good fight against the atavistic old-timers appears to come with pushing a racialist white man's burden view of the world that would be more applicable in the Victorian era.

Stop saying 'people of color'. Dividing the entire world into white and not white dumbs down everyone. The world is actually much more complex than that, and giving people racist shorthand to make sense of the complexity of different cultures and subcultures is shameful.

@joshwent: Very good post.

To me, a lot of the issues with diversity in games start with hopefully continuing to diversify developers. Realistically people often make what they know and I hope more developers of different races can help things expand going forward. Not that no one can represent a race besides their own but I think people underestimate that as a writer or creator that's actually pretty difficult to do well. I think some poor representations of racial groups or characters that people see in some media are a result of that exact thing.

Like you say, would love to see games represent more cultures and if they didn't have any white people in them, that's just fine. Like you say there is a choice there and I don't think one thing should have to be altered because the whole may have an issue with representation. Jade Empire is an example of a game that did this. Not like it dealt with complex issues or race but it had pretty much all asian characters and that was great how it was.

@imsh_pl: here's a question i'd like to ask you, kind of in tangent to that question of your own

"why is there so much demand for the justification and explanation of the existence of any minority character at all in a story"

why do they need to have a super good, fucking great, top of the line, mega amazing, thoroughly outlined and very important reason to include a character from outside of the overwhelming mass of fantasy characters, in games or out of it

and why does any sort of fictional race just get accepted like outright

why can't a character just BE there

and hell, why is it fantasy (and tons of other very much wants to tell stories based on the histories of a lot of these minority groups, but feels way more comfortable transplanting them to fictional races to act as metaphors for them, but won't include characters from that group itself

like to put it this way

white characters, in leads, supporting, or just extraneous cast, never have to provide a reason or a justification for WHY they're there, or that the creator is very intent on telling an important story with them and the fact that they're white. they can just be there. nobody questions that. not in general anyway

you add a character from outside of that, suddenly, for some reason they need to start justifying their existence and have a huge background for why they exist and why they're here and that the author has a very important reason to include them

meanwhile, on top of that, fucking mythical creatures (some that aren't even FROM polish or slavic or european myth in general) can trundle on in, unquestioned

unless i miss my mark, djinn sure as fuck do not originate from poland

at the very least, that's all fucking weird on whose existence gets questioned in a piece of fiction and why, right?

At the end of it, writers are interested in creating good characters, rather than diversifying them. It shouldn't really be up for debate.

@spacetwinks: I always find it amusing when dragons and elves and Golems are more readily accepted than POCs who literally existed in the time period.

Great point as well in this post. Not all white people are the same. There are themes and ideas and mythologies touched upon in the Witcher that are not common to other white cultures or mythologies or religion. I have seen a number of particularly Polish people loving how well Witcher 3 represents their culture and I love that. Gives me even more appreciation of it.

Had never seen "POCs" written out until this thread... yeah.

Great read, Austin!

Thanks for taking the time to write this up. Has me very much looking forward to your "Real Pieces".

Love this line, perfect summation: "It’s absolutely a minority number, but it’s not license for erasure."

I'm pretty uncomfortable with the implication that anyone that disagrees with your general sentiment are racists plucked from the 1950s, it doesn't add anything to your argument and feels weirdly accusatory. This mini-article also displays a pretty distinct lack of knowledge about Poland and its history and culture (which, granted, you admitted to) that makes your American-centric viewpoint seem somewhat ignorant.

I guess in general I'm just confused as to why this game featuring an ethnic minority's culture and heritage is being lambasted about issues of representation when there are so many more games more worthy of the same criticism.

I'm largely neutral towards this whole issue and can see where both sides are coming from. But I want to point out one thing. A lot of people seem to have taken a lot of issue with Austin saying

And whether its intentional or not, when those fans say “Why should they include a person of color?” it ends up sounding a lot like “I’m glad they didn’t include people of color. It was right of them not to. The game would be ruined otherwise.”

I can see how some people would find that kind of tone is accusatory but I do think there is a huge difference between saying "this person is saying this" and "this person sounds like he's saying this." I feel very confident in saying that Austin is not saying that everyone arguing against his point here is a racist but in order to understand why it could SOUND like that, I think you need to look at the discussion in a much broader and a much more real context.

People from various minority groups, whether they be black, women, gay, whatever, are constantly being told that their problems aren't real issues. That they're overreacting, that they're playing the race card and whatever other number of excuses people use to try to shut them up. So, to me, it makes perfect sense how these arguments could SOUND like they're coming from a racist place, even if you know full well that it's probably not. Now, obviously in the grander context of minority problems in the world whether or not there are black people in The Witcher is pretty small potatoes but I do think that larger context absolutely informs how people go about this conversation.

Because art that appeals to everyone is kitsch.

Because art that covers every issue ultimately does justice to none.

Because what art is is up to the artist.

Because the artist does not need to justify to you why they chose to make their art the way they made it. You can criticize it, you can disagree with it, you can scrutinize it; but you cannot say that because it doesn't say what you want it to say it's 'wrong art'.

Because a good video game tells the story their makers want it to tell, not that the consumers want to hear. And video games can be art.

And Witcher 3 is one of these video games.

I really could not agree with this more.

While you're right that writers are entitled to create the worlds they choose to, it is of course always up for debate. Art and/or entertainment reflects our culture and discussing its impact and influence is important. We shouldn't end or forbid the debate, we should welcome it.

It's really gross how defensive people are over the fact that this game doesn't have PoC in it. Hell it's down right aggressive. The argument sums up as "hey this game is all white people that's kinda messed up" "well you're an idiot asshole and I hate you" or "yeah but Poland". Pretty much solidifies my choice to step a little farther away from the gaming community at large was correct.

That's a lazy argument. Why not both?

Also, people of color is a perfectly legitimate shorthand term. If anyone hasn't seen that used until this thread I question what kind of writing you've read before.

Good article, although I do not appreciate slavs being called white. But then again, not much I can expect from an american writer.

And whether its intentional or not, when those fans say “Why should they include a person of color?” it ends up sounding a lot like “I’m glad they didn’t include people of color. It was right of them not to. The game would be ruined otherwise.”

I'm probably one of those who would ask "what should they?" to anyone bringing that subject up in the first place. You know, asking a question to get a conversation going.

And the first thing you do with people that ask that question is put words in their mouth that they didn't say and imply things they didn't imply and not so subtly accuse them of being racist.

I'm pretty sure i would have had a very hard time going about my daily life of working in QA surrounded by linguistic testers from all over the world for almost 4 years if i was racist. I did not in fact have a hard time going about my daily life and i've made tons of friends and learned more about different cultures in those 4 years than in the rest of my life.

Yet i would still ask the question anyway.

Well Mr. Walker, this was the first thing you wrote that i've read and as the saying goes, you only ever get one chance of making a good first impression.

I don't normally comment on these types of discussions on the forums as it quickly became exhausting and too time consuming, so I just made a general rule for myself to stay away 100% of the time and it has worked out for the last year. However.

And some fans want to lay on a sword over this. And whether its intentional or not, when those fans say “Why should they include a person of color?” it ends up sounding a lot like “I’m glad they didn’t include people of color. It was right of them not to. The game would be ruined otherwise.”

And would it? What would be ruined? It’s can’t be their escapism, a fear that they’d suddenly have to care about ethnic and racial politics–because again, the game already touches on those. Would their “immersion be broken” the first time a brown or black face walked down the street or into a tavern? I have my doubts.

This made me do a double take. Really? Really, really? I know to expect such strawmanning from time to time on the forums in general from people. Seeing a staff member do this is something I felt I had to comment on. It's ... I am lost for words. There are a lot of things this made me feel, uncomfortable doesn't begin to describe it.

No one is asking for "a token black guy". I'm responding to a blanket statement that said that "writers are interested in creating good characters, rather than diversifying them", which reads to me like they just shouldn't give a fuck about diversity, but just focus on "creating good characters". And that's a completely false choice.

I'm not saying that every story should be diverse, no one is. But that statement is way too sweeping in the other direction.

So you should consider ethnic diversity in a game based around fantasy literature which gains its tropes from medieval Europe? Did Morgan Freeman not get the call for Lord of the Rings?

In one sense I get where people are coming from this and agree that more diversity can only be a good thing however I just find it real shitty when people try to throw creators under the bus for not meeting whatever equality check boxes. Its like going back to GTA V and the "Why are there no women when there are 3 main protagonists" argument. And the answer is simple...thats the story the developers wanted to tell. Not every piece of media has to appeal or represent everyone. Sure, we should encourage diversity but this almost lynch mob mentality of telling creators what they should/shouldn't include in their stories and visions needs to absolutely stop.

@imsh_pl: wait back the fuck up

if i'm reading you right, art doesn't have to justify anything to me (or to anyone) if they don't include a character that isn't white, but if they included a character that wasn't white, you'd want, and i quote:

"Not because I don't want them to, but because I only want them to if they feel like that is a story, and arc they want to tell. Because that is an issue they want to tackle or address; something they are willing to get into, something that won't just be shoehorned in to appease US game reviewers. I want them to tell stories that they will do justice to."

so if they DON'T include a character outside of the standard in fantasy, they don't have to justify shit, but if they do, then they absolutely need to justify shit (specifically in this case, to you, for the reasons you want). they can't just have a character be there - they have to justify them.

not including someone requires zero justification and i am being particularly awful for questioning them or any media about it, but if they WERE to include them, that requires a very very good justification and a promise that they're doing it for important, good story reasons.

they can't just "be there" or exist for any other reason. they have to be there because they want to "tackle" the issue of... people who aren't white existing.

am i reading you wrong?

also you skipped the part where they included djinn which are absolutely not from european myth yet appear in the witcher anyway and that's kinda fucked that that's apparently totally unquestioned and super cool

But why ask "why would they"? Why is that even a question? Do the existence of white characters in fiction have to be justified? I just think the "I'm just asking..." question is absolutely pointless.

Can't the Witcher 3 be one of those stories?

It feels kind of weird to me that The Witcher 3 is the game we're having this conversation about. Is it because it's one of the only high profile releases recently that is all white? I'm thinking about a lot of the high profile releases I've played over the last year or two, and I'm struggling to think of a title that doesn't include people of colour.

Maybe I'm crazy, or a terrible, white, human being for suggesting this, but if it is actually one of the few releases these days to not have any people of colour...is it really not okay for there to be a game here or there that only has white people, made by a specific group of people who are part of a specific country and a specific culture?

I guess because wider culture is dominated by white people any media that doesn't include others is a problem?

Another question: if CD Projekt Red did include some token people of colour, how much would that really help this issue? I suppose even just the colour of a person's skin can help members of a wider audience relate to the world presented, but wouldn't the next complaint be simply that even with members of these various groups that their cultures aren't represented in any sort of meaningful way?

I don't mean to anger anyone with this comment, I'm just a dumb, ignorant white person spewing some probably misguided thoughts on the issue. Ultimately I'm in the priveleged position of finding it difficult to relate to the issue, and also of ultimately not caring one way or another - it would be nice if a game like The Witcher 3 could make more people comfortable with some token inclusions, I wouldn't complain if it did.

That people use the term is not actually a justification for its use, I would expect that would be self-evident. It is shorthand for anyone who is not white. I think dividing people up under such terms is inescapably racist and doesn't tell you anything about the people you're trying to label with it. Under those terms, white west coast American hippies are culturally the same as white hardline nationalist Russians and 'PoC' Japanese salarymen are the same as 'PoC' Bantu tribespeople. It's a fucking ridiculous label and saying that it is done is not enough. You are literally obsessing over people who do or don't have a single specific phenotype expressed and acting like it tells you something about them and their place in the world.

@meatball: People are having this conversation about Witcher 3 because an article sparked the conversation, and a lot of people on both "sides" responded. It's not much more complicated than that.

@demoskinos said:

Could we maybe not throw around words like lynch mob when we're talking about race, please?

@brodehouse: Nobody is saying that white cultures or POCs are homogenous. Literally no one. PoC is a useful shorthand when literally everyone who isn't white isn't represented well. It's not useful and not used in a "well there's one black dude so all POCs " are covered way which is how you're choosing to interpret it.

I mean, clearly someone is, or the rash of articles bemoaning the lack of diverse skin colors wouldn't exist.

Like, I'm having difficulty understanding this and I don't say that to be snarky. If not every story needs to be diverse, why is there such uproar over a story that happens to not, using the definition of diversity used in this conversation, be diverse?

If the argument is that not every single story needs diversity, then why is every story that doesn't have some sort of appropriate level of diversity criticized so severely? We really can't have this both ways. Everyone seems to be allowing for a percentage of stories to not have diversity in color but refuse to allow Witcher 3 to be one without a fight.

Maybe he should have. Also just because something is based off of history doesn't mean we must adhere to that history. We're talking about a world with fantastical monsters but no people of color? And medieval Europe did, indeed, have people or color from around the world.

We can and should examine and discuss these things. It doesn't mean the game is racist, or bad, or suddenly something we should be ashamed of. What would be shameful is to ignore concerns and questions from a minority who wish to be represented more honestly, or even at all.

Of course it can. But at the same time people can criticise it for not being diverse in the slightest, and offer arguments for why they don't feel that's okay. I'm not here to tell any developer what they can or cannot do, I'm just pointing out things I think are not okay and hope arguments like that are at least taken into consideration by the developer. That's all criticism is.

Yeah, the arguments of having to "justify" including anyone who isn't white in fiction has always struck me as absurd. People throwing around "but would you really like a token black guy?????" questions have just missed the point completely.