« Cost of Rebellion | Home | Second Helpings »
It’s Just A Game
By Corvus | February 16, 2006
It’s about discrimination? Come on, people, get real! Instead of griping because you can’t have gay marriages or talk about GLBT-themed or friendly guilds in a VIDEO game, why not spend your time crusading for something worthwhile?
World of Warcraft is a VIDEO GAME. There is no need to politicize and sexualize a GAME by bickering about the fine points of what sexual content is allowed and what isn’t. Next thing you know, we’ll have incest-themed groups and beastiality-themed groups… It’s a game, get a life.
Someone, who deems the whole WoW sexuality debate as “Pathetic” posted the above in the comments of Brewer Gnome’s blog. (link: Brewer Gnome.)
I’m so tired of the “it’s only a game” defense. Those who use it are clearly limiting their interactions with the world from a deluded sense of self “preservation” and/or self “protection.” Either that, or they’re hoping by belittling the battlefield they’ll win the battle. I suspect it’s a mix of the two.
I honestly don’t understand people who can slice up their lives into discreet, isolated areas. Admittedly, there are certain behaviors you don’t exhibit at work or church, which you might at a bar or concert, but on the whole, shouldn’t your behavior and beliefs remain consistent across all venues? If they don’t, I suggest that perhaps some intensive soul searching may be helpful in achieving a stronger sense of self.
Chillingly, I suspect those who quickly cry “it’s just a game” as an attempt to deride arguments, or to justify inappropriate behavior, are being consistent. If that’s the case, I can all too easily hear them saying, “It’s only one restaurant,” or, “it’s not even a very good movie theater,” every time they are exposed to an argument about injustice. But of course, it’s never just a single game, or one restaurant, or a single theater. When people feel free to express hateful views or act upon unspoken bigotry, it’s always a sign of deeper issues within our social space.
And MMOGs, whether we like it or not aren’t just games. They are pieces of software which provide an extension of our social space and as such, are inhabited by a large number of people from radically different backgrounds. A single player game which creates an intolerant environment isn’t pleasant, but as everything about the game, from its title to its cover art, will probably indicate the type of content you can expect, designers and publishers of those games are as safe as Hooters… which is to say, somewhat.
Given that MMOGs are extensions of our social space, they need to be designed very carefully and responsibly. It shouldn’t be a matter of not offending anyone, or protecting yourself legally, either. Designing a social space should be done with a set of core values and an awareness of cultures outside our own. Ideally, single player games will be designed with the same guidelines, but MMOGs, I feel, must be designed that way.
Everything that happens within the MMOG’s environment has an emotional impact upon the people who chose to inhabit it. That makes it real. Polluting an environment with intolerance is polluting, whether it happens in a newspaper, a book store, a television broadcast, a mall, or a MMOG.
To say in response to social concerns that it’s “just a game” is akin to scoffing at Rosa Parks and crying out, “It’s just a bus.”
|
February 16th, 2006 at 9:05 am
Not to mention the fact that many of those who are quick to make the “it’s only a game” argument seem to deem it perfectly normal to compare anyone who is GLBT or GLBT friendly to those in support of incest, beastiality and, my personal favorite, pedophelia. Of course, there are those who don’t go quite so far as to make such ludicrous comparisons, but they still seem to be delivering the message, “Gay people are fine as long as they don’t throw it in your face.” Oh, you mean as long as they “know their place.” Hmmm. Where have we heard those words before?
February 16th, 2006 at 9:34 am
If games were just games, then politicians wouldn’t be upset over Hot Coffee.
February 16th, 2006 at 9:35 am
(I’m not saying that politicans aren’t overreacting, acting on bad/flawed information… Games clearly matter is the point. :))
February 16th, 2006 at 1:25 pm
I’ll preface with the observation that, generally, I agree with the point you’re making. An alternate viewpoint, though:
When “all venues” includes fantasy games, my answer is no. My characters regularly exhibit behaviors and beliefs that are inconsistent with my own. When I want to buy a new hat, for example, I don’t mug the locals until I have enough money to buy one, or just find someone with a hat I like and kill them so I can take it. For many of my characters, that’s business as usual.
One of my favorite characters was extremely bigoted. Other races (non-gnomes, to be specific) were only good as servants - preferably undead ones, because those smelled better.
And these are my good characters I’m talking about. The evil ones range from “civilization bad, destroy the cities” to “terribly sorry but everyone has to die.”
I certainly hope I don’t embody these beliefs and behaviors anywhere else. I can do that in this context, though, because it’s just a game.
Some people use games to specifically explore beliefs and behaviors that they don’t encourage, either as a personality exercise or because it tells a good story. The lives of my evil characters don’t tend to end well. (Nor do the lives of my good characters, come to think of it. Must ponder that later.)
The core value of WoW with regard to cultures outside of our own is, “Kill them.” You’re either civilized (the lovely races and cities of the Alliance and the majority of the player base) or you’re a monster (undead, beast-man, demon, troll), and there’s no reconciliation between the two. You don’t want the monsters (or, conversely, the oppressors) to win, do you? Kill them. Kill their allies. Kill the farmers who bring them food. Kill the miners who bring them metals. Kill their herds, burn their towers, take their candles.
I’m sorry, were you looking for tolerance? Should we be surprised if we don’t find it here?
It’s also filled with beliefs and behaviors that we don’t espouse elsewhere. That makes it fantasy.
The problem isn’t that GLBT acceptance/awareness is a “real” issue, the problem is that it’s a sensitive issue. It’s an honest-to-goodness large scale problem that we, as a people, need to come to grips with so we can all live healthier and happier lives. It needs to be dealt with in the “real” world, and we seem to be a long way from doing that.
If you bring it up to me in game, though, be prepared for an in character opinion that, if you’re not pumping out the future soldiers of our mighty army you’re a waste of resources, and you should probably be added to the food pile rather than taking anything away from it.
Thus, the gaming world might not be the best arena for discussing these serious issues.
February 16th, 2006 at 1:41 pm
The way I’ve translated many “it’s just a game, and X doesn’t belong in it” is “it’s a game I play, and I don’t want to hear X.”
I’m guessing that these people wouldn’t mind hearing about the Super Bowl or cheerleaders or current events or other stuff that doesn’t belong. And lots of people online seem OK with bringing up sex or religion. Plenty seem OK with gay bashing.
Very few places online are sanctuaries of perfect role-playing, where the only topics discussed are related to ingame and only in context of the virtual character. And if even if Azeroth was such a place, since marriages are a sanctioned portion … why wouldn’t homosexuality be an acceptable topic? As someone else pointed out, I’m wearing a magic suit of armor and fighting orcs … but two men kissing is weird?
People use games to get away from reality, I get that. But people shouldn’t expect to be able to avoid they don’t like from the real world just because they are in the majority. It’s general chat, if you need seclusion … go somewhere else. Or go offline, which is honestly … a much better escape from the rigors of culture than listening to a hoarde of people.
February 16th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
Interesting, Undercrypt. I consider your perspective, but only within the context of someone who actually roleplays their characters.
Think of it this way:
You = Dustin Hoffman
Typical WoW Player = Tom Cruise
My point is that it could be argued that the typical WoW player is roleplaying, but only as an extension of their true selves. In this context and understanding it isn’t just a game. It’s the creation of a universe, game and characters in the same image as the one in which we exist. To have it mirror the shortcomings of our own existence is natural. To treat the shortcomings as irrelevant is irresponsible.
Last night, while playing WoW, my son said, “It sucks you can’t have a man court another man in WoW.” He’s not gay. I don’t think he even knows about the firestorm of discussion recent events have sparked. He just thought it was unusual and lame that option wasn’t available. I agree.
February 16th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
Note: My post was supposed to say “I consider your perspective valid, ”
I’m not sure what happened to the word, “valid”, but here it is.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:18 pm
UC, there are at least two levels of interaction in a shared space such as WoW. The game level and the social level. The concerns over the social space, not the game space, are what’s under discussion.
I have no issue with characters who are bigots. Brecht, in fact, has had a variety of bigotries over time. Most notably Human Paladins, then Male Night Elves. I role played those prejudices, acting surprised when individual characters proved them incorrect, and ultimately discarding them when faced with overwhelming evidence of their insupportability.
The issue at hand, however, is one of personal bigotries affecting others ability to share a social space in which they wish to role play.
I agree with your points about the construction of a game space and plan on introducing as many tools as I can to keep the Storyworld of the Drachurae Cycle intact unto itself. I just feel that’s a separate argument than the one we’re having here.
Where the crossover between game space and social space occurs, however, is a grey area and the game space of WoW, by and large, fosters, or at least actively ignores, the social bigotries of many of its players. Since so many elements of WoW seem geared towards forcing the players to re-think preconceptions of fantasy races, which can easily be translated into a practical social message, I find it very telling that such translatable elements don’t exist for other forms of bigotry.
And that observation is why I posted what I did. I also, as you’re probably well aware, don’t much believe in pure escapism. Give me an Octavia Butler, Jonathan Lethem, or a Neil Stephenson, over a Terry Brooks or Robert Jordan. Story, stripped of meaning, isn’t worth much to me and you might as well show me a Nike advert.
February 16th, 2006 at 4:32 pm
[...] As Corvus writes: Everything that happens within the MMOG’s environment has an emotional impact upon the people who chose to inhabit it. That makes it real. Polluting an environment with intolerance is polluting, whether it happens in a newspaper, a book store, a television broadcast, a mall, or a MMOG. [...]
February 16th, 2006 at 5:15 pm
I feel so… valid.
Agreed. Those people should be killed.
Well, probably not, that’s just the gnome talking, but I wouldn’t take that as an excuse to bring my own personal “real world discussion favorites” into the mix. (That and the fact that the most likely response I’d get would be, “WTF r u talking about?”)
Or: I summon demons, kill people, drain their souls, and work on a plague to eliminate humanity… and you’re worried about who’s kissing who?
Hmm. So…
Me = Tootsie
Typical WoW Player = Top Gun
Is that what you’re trying to say? Is it? Huh?
Very well put. (Insert Gnostic discussion here.)
If we have a responsibility that our creations (e.g., games, characters) reflect our values and beliefs, how do we best approach those aspects which are controversial?
Example: I consider _______ to be a horrific crime against body and soul. Do I include it in my world to show how terrible it is, or do I not talk about it at all and pretend it doesn’t exist? Or do I try and portray it in the best light possible since some people approve of it?
Should a person who fills in the blank with “slavery” act differently than a person who fills in the blank with “being gay”? Both people exist.
What’s stopping them? Honest question, I don’t know.
It seems there’s a mix of levels here. There’s a level of game design where controversial issues are largely unaddressed. There’s also a level of company policy about what subjects are appropriate and inappropriate for public discussion, regardless of game content, which is largely separate. It’s easy to imagine a situation where those two levels don’t exactly match up.
February 16th, 2006 at 5:52 pm
Oh, and I meant to jump on the acting analogy.
I’d like the Honeycomb Engine™ to fill the role of P.T. Anderson and coax Magnolia-worthy performances out of the Tom Cruises of the MMOG scene.
For those that can’t be helped… well, I have plans for the Tom Greens and Steve Gutenbergs as well.
February 16th, 2006 at 6:39 pm
Have I ever told you that you have beautiful blockquotes?
(cough) Right then. Social level, company policy level.
Add this question to the fill-in-the-blank example above: Do I let people talk about it?
I wonder if this is an aspect of the bully in the playground.
February 16th, 2006 at 6:55 pm
In the interest of trying to establish a common vocabulary:
I wouldn’t consider the ‘company policy’ a level of the game space, but a set of principles which govern the interactions employees and customers have with the game space.
February 16th, 2006 at 7:04 pm
In fact, if the Storyscape is designed so that the ‘company policy’ must intrude upon the environment, I don’t think the company policy is robust or clear enough, the social space flexible enough, or the game space particularly well designed…
But I’m going to have to chew on that notion a bit before I’m willing to commit to it.
Also, silence is a problem (as your link indicates). I find it’s better to talk about it and risk offending, than to be silent about it and guarantee offending.
February 16th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
Tootsie? I was thinking more of Rainman…
Seriously, though:
You got it. That’s exactly the problem! These are two things that should not be separate! While it’s easy to imagine the situation where the two levels don’t exactly match, it’s something that a company needs to make sure matches. Yeah, there will be imperfections, but a company’s policy should include deliberate planning and attempts to coordinate the two. In Blizzard’s case, this does not appear to be true.
February 17th, 2006 at 1:17 pm
Reality is only a game. That doesn’t mean it isn’t worth fighting for.
February 23rd, 2006 at 11:25 am
[...] Man Bytes Blog: It’s Just a Game: This post debunks the “it’s just a game” defense us “sensitive” types have thrown at us when we oppose racism, sexism, or in the case of this post, homophobia in video games. Corvus offers this chilling observation: Chillingly, I suspect those who quickly cry “it’s just a game” as an attempt to deride arguments, or to justify inappropriate behavior, are being consistent. If that’s the case, I can all too easily hear them saying, “It’s only one restaurant,” or, “it’s not even a very good movie theater,” every time they are exposed to an argument about injustice. But of course, it’s never just a single game, or one restaurant, or a single theater. When people feel free to express hateful views or act upon unspoken bigotry, it’s always a sign of deeper issues within our social space. [...]