Opinion Piece - Politics In Gaming

In a recent article of GameInformer magazine written by Associate Editor, Elise Favis, readers are exposed to the often controversial topic of placing political elements in video games. According to her assessment, a majority of the gaming community would be opposed to this invasive practice of placing these often not-too-subtle points of contention in their titles. This might be in part due to the ideal of most gamers having a medium of escapism from the world's harsh realities of life. There is an expectation of entertainment value without pondering too much.

There are radical movements such as GamerGate that passionately oppose such realism. However, I share the sentiment that Favis has in that "Politics not only matter, but they also make for better games and better stories." That's not to say that every game should apply such politically motivated components to them.

What are politics anyway? For those of you that are unaware (or those that have tried to repress any form of such discussion), politics essentially boils down to the theories and practices of governing or influencing other people in society. This often means curbing people's actions either for the benefit or detriment of the public. Ideally, the former is more desireable than the latter, but there are those that often use their power and dominion to persuade others to be corruptible.

There have been some games that fall completely flat when trying to spur feelings of activism or social awareness. None come to my mind at this moment, but it's fair to say that a political approach does not always enhance the entertainment value of a video game.

The gaming industry is ever changing though and preconceived notions of fantasy and science fiction have constantly been reshaped to fit the times. Indie developers are always trying to push the envelope digitally with enhanced graphics and storylines. It is thus to be expected that future narratives will mimic and reflect the values and concerns of the decade. As Elise Favis puts it, "The most memorable games are the ones that leave you to ponder their meanings, and politics are just one of the many methods to facilitate discussion."

Furthermore, video games (at least in my own personal opinion) are indeed a form of art, akin to the works of contemporary novelists and abstract artisans. There are numerous stories that can be told with players offered ultimatums that effect the worlds they inhabit, however briefly. Favis uses examples of games such as Mafia III, Deus Ex: Mankind Divided, and The Last of Us Part II, but one example that immediately comes to my mind is that of Ubisoft's Watch Dogs 2.

The microaggressive actions of Brody Goodale, senior programmer for the fictional tech company Nudle, upon Horatio Carlin for one instance, brought light to a daily problem in the real world felt by minorities. Harassment and general glares of suspicion are not uncommon from white, privileged individuals towards persons of color, even if they are law abiding citizens.

One scene that stood out for me involved a high tech automobile with an artificial intelligence (AI) that tells Marcus Holloway that facial recognition can’t identify him because his skin is too dark. This was an example in-game of a real-world incident where cameras by HP could not recognize dark-skinned individuals. Watch Dogs 2 is one of my most enjoyed games.

I can't say I didn't laugh when the AI had trouble profiling Marcus, but sometimes humor is the only option we have in order to keep calm in those moments of high tension. Often, comedy and satire increase the awareness of such issues. We're all human. We all make mistakes. No one is perfect. However, that doesn't mean we can't try to be better people. As with all things, we should use a modicum of moderation when applying political undertones.

Works Cited

Favis, E. (2017, June). Get Your Politics Into My Games. GameInformer, (290), 32-32.

Gamer Journalism: Pointing Fingers Without Taking Blame

As a gamer, I like to think of myself as among a group of individuals (male or female) that may or may not have a selective interest in virtual media. I've perhaps stated once before that video games are akin to books in that (more often than not) they tell a story of some kind, whether it's simple or complex. They come in a variety of different genres and styles, all with some sort of protagonist and antagonist. It's fair to say that one individual's tastes may differ from another's, but at the end of the day, those that use the medium are all collectively and equally described as "readers" or in this case, "gamers".

...Or so I thought. Apparently within the "gaming community" a storm has arisen. Rather, several storms are on the horizon so to speak, as gaming journalists are under fierce scrutiny as well as the very vulnerable medium itself. On social media, common hashtags have surfaced such as #GamerGate and #GamesSoWhite. (For those unaware of what is trending, there have been numerous political discussions regarding racial depictions in video games as well as sexism in video game culture.)

Essentially, a culture war has been manifesting over gaming culture diversification, artistic recognition and social criticism of video games, which all incorporate a gamer's "social identity". 

Gamergate for instance, was the result of a sustained campaign of misogynistic attacks back in August of 2014 against game developers Zoe Quinn and Brianna Wu, in addition to the feminist cultural critic, Anita Sarkeesian, who were subjected to severe cyber-bullying and multiple death threats. Now, while some individuals using the #gamergate hashtag have stated that their goal is to improve the ethical standards of video game journalism by peacefully opposing social criticism in video game reviews (which they claim is the result of a conspiracy among feminists, progressives and social critics) others have used more distasteful methods. It's become somewhat frustrating (as well as downright exhausting) as some gamers view this phenomenon as a detour of legitimate gaming reviews focused primarily on the premises of the games themselves while others view this as a rather valid critique.

The most recent trend has been about the depictions (or lack thereof) of minority characters in video games. I tend not to dwell too much upon how many minorities are visible in a video game (despite being a minority in real life), but every now and then, I'm reminded of the panel on Politics in Video Games I attended at ColossalCon back in 2012. That panel discussed many subtle issues in many of the games I played. I typically will create characters (whenever possible in a customizable game) reflective of my own racial skin tone, but for the most part I feel that it's mostly aesthetic and has no bearing on how I play the game. My skills tell the tale, not how my protagonist looks.

One troubling thought that never occurred to me prior to that panel was the fact that the protagonist of the Legend of Zelda franchise, Link, was a blonde haired, blue-eyed character that could have been easily associated with the Aryan race along with Princess Zelda, while Ganondorf, the antagonist (and the only male minority Gerudo character) was not, and was considered "evil" (In some of the games, he's merely jealous of Hyrule's prosperity and acted out of envy. One game in particular, The Wind Waker, comes to mind.) More often than not, there are few, if any, meaningful minority characters at all in a majority of video games. Most of the time, players are playing as a Caucasian male. This is certainly not reflective of the times. That's not to say that there should be mandated quotas, but some ethnic diversity is more than welcome.

Nonetheless, it has sort of popped my proverbial "bubble" in the fantasy realm. I now look at some of my games through a begrudgingly tainted perspective. A once enjoyable escape from the harshness of reality, has now become grossly entangled in its grasp.

As a political science graduate, I can obviously see the correlations between my favorite pastime and politics. However, as such, it truly pains me to see how hostile and divided the gaming community has become. I like to view the personal and political aspects of life to be somewhat equal, but separate entities (much like the separation of "Church & State"). There may be a bit of a spillover effect from one end to the other, or vice-versa, but too much of one aspect without consideration for the other can, and often will, produce disastrous results.

I suppose what I wish to happen is a tolerance AND a formal acknowledgement of the cultural and ethical dilemmas posed in video games, at least for now (that is, until gradual improvements have been made). Change will not happen overnight. In addition, many folks are not as tolerant of change as others (which is fine, to an extent). Yet, what players & journalists need to realize is that the industry itself is only one facet of the problem, while the consumers themselves are another. Both are at fault, as I see it, because consumers have the power to boycott those products that they don't agree with, thereby forcing developers to re-evaluate their content in order to produce a worthwhile product. (I've done so myself countless times).

I hope that as the dust settles, we can get back to discussing the plots and storylines of games rather than being so enamored with the political miasma of a game. Games are meant to be thought-provoking, amusing, and enjoyable...not capable of inducing undue burden.