Do you think videogames should be a political platform?

[m76]

Why?

I recently encountered a game where the main menu boldly proclaimed the creators political affiliations.

I think that is way out of line. Games are escapism, a place to let off steam. Bringing day to day politics into games is an affront, and I take it as an invasion of my personal space.
They don't have the qualification, nor the moral right to lecture their customers on politics.

I don't think game developers should concern themselves with actual politics even outside their games. Except as private citizens when not representing their company. And actually this rule should be heeded by all companies even outside of gaming.
.

[The Blackangel]

People will do anything they can to push their own agenda. It doesn’t matter what that agenda is. Religion, politics, racial, environmental, and so on. It’s a sad fact of life, but sadly one we have no choice but to deal with.

[Reality vs Adventure]

If we can pass a law to ban lobbying, that would eliminate much need for companies to get political in the first place. If they still feel the need to go rebel in a game, know it opens the door for all to go rebel. Nothing like a republican fascist holding my flag claiming to be a patriot. You have confederate flags for a reason red hats. 

[m76]

On 10/14/2020 at 7:39 AM, Reality vs Adventure said:

If we can pass a law to ban lobbying, that would eliminate much need for companies to get political in the first place. If they still feel the need to go rebel in a game, know it opens the door for all to go rebel. Nothing like a republican fascist holding my flag claiming to be a patriot. You have confederate flags for a reason red hats. 

Nah companies don't get political because of lobbying, except maybe for government contractors. They do it to win sympathy points so they bend wherever the wind blows. Often it's not even top down, it it's lower level employees trying to be activists. And subverting the huge platform that is gaming to promote their agenda. So they can congratulate themselves on twitter on how swell guys they are by condemning bad things, or whatever. But we already know bad is bad, and some 20 something intern fresh out of social studies class telling me that bad thing is bad just feels pretentious.

[Reality vs Adventure]

I think that if a company wanted to pay off a president to promote its product for a political message, then that could be considered lobbying because that message could sway public opinion and votes, which in itself could cause bills to be passed that they wanted in the first place. So it is more of an indirect lobbying. To do it just to gain sales in a new market that is politically motivated simply opens up a crisis in the gaming world. One side will boycott games they oppose and the gaming world becomes forever political as one company tries to outdo the other in their political motive. 

A game that has politics from past history is different because it's all old blood. But current events in a game is open wounds that enables fresh blood to spill. 

[Jakeyjake]

On 10/12/2020 at 5:19 PM, m76 said:

Why?

I recently encountered a game where the main menu boldly proclaimed the creators political affiliations.

I think that is way out of line. Games are escapism, a place to let off steam. Bringing day to day politics into games is an affront, and I take it as an invasion of my personal space.
They don't have the qualification, nor the moral right to lecture their customers on politics.

I don't think game developers should concern themselves with actual politics even outside their games. Except as private citizens when not representing their company. And actually this rule should be heeded by all companies even outside of gaming.
.

Donald Trump would love your eagerness to limit free speech.  I am having difficulty making sense of what your issue with political speech in games is.  

Firstly, what game was that just so I have an idea of what you are talking about?

On 10/12/2020 at 5:19 PM, m76 said:

I think that is way out of line. Games are escapism, a place to let off steam. Bringing day to day politics into games is an affront, and I take it as an invasion of my personal space.
They don't have the qualification, nor the moral right to lecture their customers on politics.

Wow!  It is definitely out of the norm, but not out of line.  Here is what would be out of line: suppressing anybody's first amendment rights because of your personal distaste.  If the creators wanted to boldly announce their political leanings within the game itself, that's their right as creators.  If they are self-funded, self-published, or funded by a publisher who is willing to grant them that degree of independence, then who are you to say that it's an invasion of your "personal space" as you put it?   The first amendment protects freedom of speech and that includes all forms of media including movies, books, and yes, games.  The creative team didn't force themselves into your space.  Instead, you INVITED them into your space by purchasing and playing the game.  If you object to their speech, you retain the right to eject their product from your space.  So they are not "invading" you. 

As for your opinion that they don't have the qualifications or moral right to lecture people on politics:  are you serious?  This is the United States: you don't need to have "qualifications" to exercise your right to free speech or talk about certain subjects, regardless of format.  Do you not need "qualfiications" and a "moral right" to use political speech, but they do?   Why -- and how would that be constitutional?

 

Edited October 18, 2020 by Jakeyjake

[m76]

1 hour ago, Jakeyjake said:

Donald Trump would love your eagerness to limit free speech.  I am having difficulty making sense of what your issue with political speech in games is.  

No, I'm not trying to limit anyone's free  speech. Where did you get that idea? Is that projection? From your tone it seems to me you would limit the free speech of DT supporters wouldn't you, if you had the power?

My issue that is that direct references to real world politics in a fictional universe doesn't make any sense. It's immersion breaking and it's the subversion of the platform for personal and selfish reasons. Eg: Instead of making the best game possible, they are trying to use the reach of videogames to send messages. Mostly for no other reason but virtue signalling their own perceived awesomeness into the ether.  Or do you think putting references or in some cases open political messages in games actually helps any cause?

I never suggested it should be banned, I'm just complaining as a regular customer of games. If they want to do it, they can go right ahead, I'll just ignore games from any developer who does it.

Quote

Firstly, what game was that just so I have an idea of what you are talking about?

I talk about all games, not any specific one. But the one that prompted me to open this topic was NFS: Payback.

 

Edited October 18, 2020 by m76

[m76]

1 hour ago, Jakeyjake said:

Wow!  It is definitely out of the norm, but not out of line.  Here is what would be out of line: suppressing anybody's first amendment rights because of your personal distaste. 

Again what gives you the idea that I wanted to suppress their rights by force?

 

1 hour ago, Jakeyjake said:

If the creators wanted to boldly announce their political leanings within the game itself, that's their right as creators.  If they are self-funded, self-published, or funded by a publisher who is willing to grant them that degree of independence, then who are you to say that it's an invasion of your "personal space" as you put it?

And it is my right as a customer to express my distaste at it. Wouldn't that also fall in free speech?

I perceive it as an invasion of my personal space, for petty, political reasons, that affect maybe 1% of the world's population.

Americans often seem to forget that they are not the world, I'm not from the US, and I have no stake in their petty political bickering, and even if I had the time and place for it is not in entertainment media, as in videogames.

1 hour ago, Jakeyjake said:

The first amendment protects freedom of speech and that includes all forms of media including movies, books, and yes, games.  The creative team didn't force themselves into your space.  Instead, you INVITED them into your space by purchasing and playing the game.  If you object to their speech, you retain the right to eject their product from your space.  So they are not "invading" you. 

Believe me that's what I did immediately. And if they want to include politics in their games, they can forget me ever supporting a political campaign with my money.
It is an invasion, because I play games in my personal space, and them injecting politics into games is at the least unexpected and unwelcome.

1 hour ago, Jakeyjake said:

As for your opinion that they don't have the qualifications or moral right to lecture people on politics:  are you serious?  This is the United States: you don't need to have "qualifications" to exercise your right to free speech or talk about certain subjects, regardless of format.  Do you not need "qualfiications" and a "moral right" to use political speech, but they do?   Why -- and how would that be constitutional?

What I mean is that they have no more moral right to lecture anyone on  politics, they are not arbiters of ultimate truths and what is right and wrong. And as such using the platform they have access to for personal politics is morally questionable.  And again: This is not the US, games are not only sold in Murica. They are equal in every part of the world. So they absolutely have no moral right to drag me into this fight, where both sides are questionable. 

Edited October 18, 2020 by m76

[The Blackangel]

If you really want to see politics in video games, there was a game on Colecovision called Campaign '84 that was literally a political game based on the 1984 presidential election. That's literally all it was, and apparently it sold really well. You could choose between the Democratic party or the republiKlan party. It was interesting to say the least, and pointless to say the most.

[m76]

17 hours ago, The Blackangel said:

If you really want to see politics in video games, there was a game on Colecovision called Campaign '84 that was literally a political game based on the 1984 presidential election. That's literally all it was, and apparently it sold really well. You could choose between the Democratic party or the republiKlan party. It was interesting to say the least, and pointless to say the most.

Well, historical events are not the same as current day politics that are still being debated.

I don't have a problem with political themes in games, I Have a problem with using games as a platform for political activism that is in no way related to the game's plot.

[The Blackangel]

Historical? It wasn't WW2. It was an election. It was a game that you could vote in, choose what current issues to give attention to, and which ones to ignore. The closest to anything historical that happened in the 80's was the Satanic panic, and the president/vice president committing high treason in the Iran/Contra issue.

[Empire]

I think the real issue is that larger budget games want to appeal to the widest possible audience, to justify the cost of production. A game that takes a harsh stance against a political view or philosophical idea has the potential to immediately alienate half of its potential audience. Far Cry 5 was obviously originally conceived with religious fundamentalism in mind but the game that reached us was devoid of any criticism of the ideas that seemed to inspire the game. So basically it's because of money. Films have the same issue, yet we still manage to get critical and thought-provoking films. Expecting far cry 5 to take a strong stance is like expecting the next marvel movie to take a strong stance, these are blockbusters purely intended to make as much money as possible. However there are smaller films, made on lower budgets, that take stances, you just have to do a bit of work to find them. Of course, this isn't completely like-for-like with video games, but then video games are a much much newer artistic medium, I can't see any reason why video games will be any different from films in that regard in a few years. 

[m76]

On 11/10/2020 at 1:20 PM, Empire said:

 

I think Far Cry 5 was a huge missed opportunity. It could've been gritty and great instead it was as generic as it gets. It didn't need to attack any real world religion. Only the methods of cults. The fundamentalist religios were alienated by it as is, so they could've gone the extra mile without loosing anyone.

Edited November 11, 2020 by m76

[killamch89]

My answer is no. Keep politics out of videogames - most people play videogames to "escape" from the real world. Why on Earth would anybody want politics in a video game is beyond me. There are so many platforms for politics already. We don't need them taking something fun and ruining it with their crap that benefits a few people at the cost of the majority.