Inclusivity in games

[Fairy Godfeather]

Okay! No more use of the word inclusivity for me.

Despite the simplicity of Harvest Moon and how easy it would be to include same-sex romance options they never did in any of the versions I played. In fact they seemed to go actively out of their way to disable anything that even smelled of a same-sex relationship.

I do think artwork provides the most obvious limit on the visual novel genre. I say that as a writer though, who just looks at the sheer amount of art that would be required and boggles. Unless you decide on no CGs or very, very limited ones.

Wouldn't it be nice if a silent/mute protagonist actually were mute? Although that might be conveying a negative image of why all these mute protagonists have decided to take up killing as a way of expressing themselves.

One of the problems with the "generic protagonist" is that in so many cases, the protagonist isn't generic at all... the sex, race, and various personality elements actually are set, intentionally or not, and quite often based on the writing team's assumptions of what "normal" is.

Yes. This.

[Blue Lemma]

Personally I think this thread would strongly benefit from dropping the use of the word 'inclusive', which is being used to mean AT LEAST three wildly different things.

I'll go a step further and say it conjures up images of touchy-feely seminars or guest speakers and let's talk about our feelings~ <3

At least for some of us

But being able to see people like you is important in media, whether it's your gender, race, sexuality, body shape, age, because it makes you feel like you belong. Looking at a lot of media I consume, you would swear 90% of the world was white, which is a load of bull. I know that every time I go outside.

I'm not really convinced... I'm Japanese-American, but I don't remember seeing Asian-Americans in media growing up, nor did I care. My sense of belonging came from my friends and family, not from whatever media, and it didn't come from my race either. I think we (at least in the US, especially in TV series and commercials) have gone so far the other way trying to make people in media diverse, that you'd think every workplace has a member of every "major" race, and every guy hangs out in mixed-race groups to watch sports all the time. It's a nice thought, but just not true. Rather, it comes off as forced a lot of times.

So I don't see any harm in mixing it up with your cast of characters so more people can feel like they belong.

Okay. How about:

"I don't see any harm in adding educational tidbits to your game so people who play can come away smarter."

"I don't see any harm in translating your game to multiple languages so more people outside your own culture can play it."

"I don't see any harm in donating 10% of sales from a commercial game to charity so that the disadvantaged can be helped."

Can't argue much with those either without killing warm fuzzies, right? Yet they are neither here nor there when it comes to the task of making games in general.

What I'm saying is that it's not a game maker's responsibility to do these things. The game maker's responsibility is, by definition, to make games - and in a general human decency sense, to not be totally irresponsible (i.e. making "How to pull off the perfect murder step by step - A simulation") Anything else should be completely at the discretion of the one putting in the work, the maker. If funded, the investors, too. Games are about personal creativity, fantasy, and fun. If a cast of diverse characters is fun for you, it helps your story, or whatever else, I'd say go for it If not, don't. Neither one makes you a good or bad person, which is the vibe I'm getting from some posts.

[EroBotan]

Okay! No more use of the word inclusivity for me.

Despite the simplicity of Harvest Moon and how easy it would be to include same-sex romance options they never did in any of the versions I played. In fact they seemed to go actively out of their way to disable anything that even smelled of a same-sex relationship.

well, from what I read in various forums they actually did it .. so you can go yaoi or yuri route by default, but during the localization process when they try to release it to western market, the same-sex feature got localized AKA removed.

[noeinan]

At least for some of us

But being able to see people like you is important in media, whether it's your gender, race, sexuality, body shape, age, because it makes you feel like you belong. Looking at a lot of media I consume, you would swear 90% of the world was white, which is a load of bull. I know that every time I go outside.

I'm not really convinced... I'm Japanese-American, but I don't remember seeing Asian-Americans in media growing up, nor did I care. My sense of belonging came from my friends and family, not from whatever media, and it didn't come from my race either. I think we (at least in the US, especially in TV series and commercials) have gone so far the other way trying to make people in media diverse, that you'd think every workplace has a member of every "major" race, and every guy hangs out in mixed-race groups to watch sports all the time. It's a nice thought, but just not true. Rather, it comes off as forced a lot of times.

I'm sure whether or not you feel excluded from certain media pockets depends on how much you identify with whatever identity is being excluded. Also, how much other identities of yours are being catered to and how much important identities of yours are being degraded. There are varying levels to these things:

1. You identity is completely absent. (Intersexed characters fall into this in most media pockets, people with disability, people of color etc.)
2. Your identity is not taken seriously/only used in humor or to fill a very specific niche. (For example, gay characters exist but always used as the comedy sidekick, always gives fashion advice to women, etc.)
3. Your identity is outright disrespected or always portrayed as villainous. (Male cross dressers in a lot of early anime, or men wearing makeup in general)

Even if you personally don't feel the bite of being excluded or ridiculed in the media, other people do. It's easy to say that people are making a big deal out of nothing when you are not affected. Also, what kind of group feels 'forced' is going to be different depending on who is watching the show. If you grew up in a predominantly colored neighborhood, have predominantly colored friends, and go to a predominantly colored school then seeing a case of all white guys and maybe one white chick in every show seems contrived and unrealistic.

So I don't see any harm in mixing it up with your cast of characters so more people can feel like they belong.

Okay. How about:

"I don't see any harm in adding educational tidbits to your game so people who play can come away smarter."

"I don't see any harm in translating your game to multiple languages so more people outside your own culture can play it."

"I don't see any harm in donating 10% of sales from a commercial game to charity so that the disadvantaged can be helped."

Can't argue much with those either without killing warm fuzzies, right? Yet they are neither here nor there when it comes to the task of making games in general.

What I'm saying is that it's not a game maker's responsibility to do these things. The game maker's responsibility is, by definition, to make games - and in a general human decency sense, to not be totally irresponsible (i.e. making "How to pull off the perfect murder step by step - A simulation") Anything else should be completely at the discretion of the one putting in the work, the maker. If funded, the investors, too. Games are about personal creativity, fantasy, and fun. If a cast of diverse characters is fun for you, it helps your story, or whatever else, I'd say go for it If not, don't. Neither one makes you a good or bad person, which is the vibe I'm getting from some posts.

I think that different people feel different social responsibility. I feel like it is my responsibility to examine my upbringing and my prejudices and then actively combat those prejudices. If I were to make a game, I would feel like it was my responsibility to not just go with whatever everyone else was doing a the time and to try to make a game that is both enjoyable and not harmful to society. I feel this way because I am a part of several minority communities and an ally to many others and I work towards equality for those communities in all areas of my life. Game making is one area of my life, and it's one that might reach out to a lot of people.

This doesn't mean I'm going to shove it so full of PC whatever that it's not fun. I want to make fun and interesting games. But I don't believe that the inclusion of people of color, gender and sexual minorities, or people with disabilities makes my game any less fun and interesting. In fact, I think it's more fun and interesting because it includes things that not a lot of other games include!

However, I don't think it's everyone's responsibility to do the things that I do. I am going to go out of my way to have lots of different types of characters in my games, and I might need to spread that out over several games to make it work. Does everyone have to do this? No. I would argue that people should at least strive not to be boring in their games by using super overdone tropes like Damsel in Distress by the book. But not everyone is making games for other people-- some people just want to make a game that is their fantasy. And if the game is primarily for you, then do whatever you want! But if the game is for other people, I would just say at least be aware if your cast is entirely white or male or whatever, so that when you release your game the characters are that way because you chose for them to be that way and not because you just didn't notice or couldn't think of anything different.

[Fairy Godfeather]

well, from what I read in various forums they actually did it .. so you can go yaoi or yuri route by default, but during the localization process when they try to release it to western market, the same-sex feature got localized AKA removed.

Oh, I remember hearing about that. That's even worse, that they actively removed it. What was the point? I remember being really disappointed in the Sims games I bought for the DS because they only allowed opposite sex relationships, despite the selling point of the franchise being for me that you could have same-sex relations.

[Greeny]

Also games like Skyrim or the first Dragon Age where the protagonist is very clearly supposed to be the embodiment of "you."

I have to disagree there. Games like Skyrim, I'd arue, are actually a great example of being both; You can indeed play the game as yourself, but you are just as well allowed to craft a unique character with their own personality and backstory.

[TrickWithAKnife]

Perhaps our responsibility for including various groups outside the default audience is as a community, rather than as individuals. We don't need to make every game for every person, but perhaps the community as a whole can cater for a wide range of people.

[Blue Lemma]

Even if you personally don't feel the bite of being excluded or ridiculed in the media, other people do. It's easy to say that people are making a big deal out of nothing when you are not affected.

I didn't say no one felt bad from being excluded in media nor did I say it was a big deal over nothing. I just said I personally didn't care, so I'm not going to accept without evidence the assertion that seeing people representative of oneself in media is very important for most people. Just giving my own experience and saying that Auro didn't speak for me.

Ridicule is a different story. If you only have so many characters of your [insert type of group] then if they're often ridiculous and negative, that would be annoying. For instance, the old "Asian guys are nerds and have tiny penises haha" oooh that's so original and funny

Also, what kind of group feels 'forced' is going to be different depending on who is watching the show. If you grew up in a predominantly colored neighborhood, have predominantly colored friends, and go to a predominantly colored school then seeing a case of all white guys and maybe one white chick in every show seems contrived and unrealistic.

That's a good point. I'm going to take my best guess, though, that most small social groups or workgroups don't have members from at least two minority groups, though it's commonplace on TV. Maybe it's the cynic in me, but it feels forced mostly in commercials... probably because of the more obvious and direct profit motive.

The ideal of super-mixed groups is nice, but it's just not the general reality. People tend to marry within their own race, and people tend to socialize within their own race more per capita than others.

One of many studies on this: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/4 ... 2338440617

So when I see it in media a lot, it often seems forced. Not that having super-mixed groups in media is a bad thing: after all, their goal is to appeal to as large an audience as possible, and it feels fuzzy (like "look how harmonious and post-racial we are here in the good old US of A" whether true or not :/ ). But it still sticks out.

However, I don't think it's everyone's responsibility to do the things that I do. I am going to go out of my way to have lots of different types of characters in my games, and I might need to spread that out over several games to make it work. Does everyone have to do this? No. I would argue that people should at least strive not to be boring in their games by using super overdone tropes like Damsel in Distress by the book. But not everyone is making games for other people-- some people just want to make a game that is their fantasy. And if the game is primarily for you, then do whatever you want! But if the game is for other people, I would just say at least be aware if your cast is entirely white or male or whatever, so that when you release your game the characters are that way because you chose for them to be that way and not because you just didn't notice or couldn't think of anything different.

*clap clap clap* Great way of putting it

[EroBotan]

I'm surprised, but probably the most inclusive game is Street Fighters XD

Oh, I remember hearing about that. That's even worse, that they actively removed it. What was the point? I remember being really disappointed in the Sims games I bought for the DS because they only allowed opposite sex relationships, despite the selling point of the franchise being for me that you could have same-sex relations.

yeah, that's sucks but being different is always a problem in this world. If it make you better there is a playable ROM hack of Harvest Moon GBA for yuri route. The yaoi version is still on the works though

[noeinan]

I didn't say no one felt bad from being excluded in media nor did I say it was a big deal over nothing. I just said I personally didn't care, so I'm not going to accept without evidence the assertion that seeing people representative of oneself in media is very important for most people. Just giving my own experience and saying that Auro didn't speak for me.

I feel that you don't need to take a poll of the importance of representation in order to figure out that the lack of representation locks certain people out of certain cultures. Right now, gaming culture is aimed at white/straight/cis/males and because of this most of the voices being broadcast about gaming are of that demographic. That demographic is also disproportionately represented in the numbers of gamers.

To me, this is the same phenomenon that keeps male-dominated workplaces male-dominated. If the gaming industry took the time to broaden its representation, it would draw in a lot more people from different walks of life. Instead, it centers on one type of person, advertises to them, makes games for them, and thus attracts mostly them. There are a few games that break this trend, but not many compared to the ones that don't. If representation isn't important to most people, why is it that demographics are not roughly equal to their ratio in the general population?

Ridicule is a different story. If you only have so many characters of your [insert type of group] then if they're often ridiculous and negative, that would be annoying. For instance, the old "Asian guys are nerds and have tiny penises haha" oooh that's so original and funny

That's pretty much how it feels to be outside of the target gaming demographic. Oh, the only female characters are the princess (who gets captured), the bar wench (who sleeps with the MC and does nothing useful), and the evil villainess (who is madly in love with the big bad and sacrifices herself for him.) Or "hey, there's a blind character! Aaaand they're a seer." A fat character who is comedic or grossly unattractive and evil. Etc.

That's a good point. I'm going to take my best guess, though, that most small social groups or workgroups don't have members from at least two minority groups, though it's commonplace on TV. Maybe it's the cynic in me, but it feels forced mostly in commercials... probably because of the more obvious and direct profit motive.

The ideal of super-mixed groups is nice, but it's just not the general reality. People tend to marry within their own race, and people tend to socialize within their own race more per capita than others.

Thinking about the diversity of your cast isn't the same as making it Taste The Rainbow. The gaming industry isn't so diverse that you need to make every character a different race/religion/nationality/etc. just to make it stand out. Actually, just not having the majority of your cast be white and male makes it stand out. Five man band with more females than males, and it's not a harem genre? Maybe your cast doesn't have more than two minority groups-- the cast is mostly Hispanic with one white character!

In any case, I guess another reason why I want to point this out is that I am super bored of games with a white/straight/cis/male main character. If the plot is mediocre and the cast keeps to the majority demographic, I'm going to have a hard time liking the game. Probably won't even try it unless it's got great reviews. Other people might not mind as much, but I'm pretty burnt out on it. I want to play games that are different, that have perspectives and characters that I don't see as often. I also want good stories-- a good story will get me to like something in spite of it's narrow demographic. But it is in spite of it. I'd rather like a game for all that it is, not "even though all the female characters were poorly written and everyone was white." And because of my background in social justice that kind of thing will stand out and really distract me from the game, a trait that I share with (perhaps not the majority, but) a large minority of others.

[Blue Lemma]

I've seen it too many times before that when someone (me in this case) tries to provide a counterpoint or alternate angle to some of the ideology promoted in threads like these, everything blows up. Even when it's me saying my own experiences as a minority member are not consistent with what some people are claiming "should" be true in their own version of the world. I at least provide supporting reference for my assertions when they are not my personal opinion or experience.

So I'm going to bow out rather than continue with the debate.

[noeinan]

I've seen it too many times before that when someone (me in this case) tries to provide a counterpoint or alternate angle to some of the ideology promoted in threads like these, everything blows up. Even when it's me saying my own experiences as a minority member are not consistent with what some people are claiming "should" be true in their own version of the world. I at least provide supporting reference for my assertions when they are not my personal opinion or experience.

So I'm going to bow out rather than continue with the debate.

I hadn't realized that everything blew up, nor that I had said your experience was invalid, nor that my opinion was the true version of the world to the exclusion of all others. I am sorry that my posts gave you that impression, I was merely trying to explain something. I did not realize that you were offended or that I was pushing your buttons, so I apologize for that was not my intent.

[Blue Lemma]

No biggie, I'm not offended. In my experience, "offense" is often more a reflection of the offended than whatever caused the offense. "Easily offended" is just another way of saying "thin-skinned." There can be disagreement, annoyance, etc. but "offense" implies someone did something wrong, to offend, and the offended too often use that opportunity to demonize and attack. People really shouldn't give so much weight and emotional investment to words a stranger writes on the internet.

I've just seen these types of discussions a lot and don't really care to bash my head into a wall :p These conversations frustrate me more than anything. I like "pushing my buttons" as you put it, but no need to apologize for inadvertently doing that

[PyTom]

Right now, gaming culture is aimed at white/straight/cis/males and because of this most of the voices being broadcast about gaming are of that demographic.

Gaming culture writ large is off-topic for this forum - our demographics are massively different from those of more traditional games, and there are more appropriate places to discuss problems with the game industry.

Perhaps our responsibility for including various groups outside the default audience is as a community, rather than as individuals. We don't need to make every game for every person, but perhaps the community as a whole can cater for a wide range of people.

I don't see how. I mean, we have BxG, GxG, GxB, BxB, FutaxFuta, BxPillowcase, and the occasional non-romantic game. It's tough to see who we aren't catering to. More importantly - it's not like there's some sort of central control center where we assign people projects. People work on what they want to, and that's a good thing.

Honestly, I wonder why people feel the need to have this sort of conversation here, of all places.

[TrickWithAKnife]

Perhaps our responsibility for including various groups outside the default audience is as a community, rather than as individuals. We don't need to make every game for every person, but perhaps the community as a whole can cater for a wide range of people.

I don't see how. I mean, we have BxG, GxG, GxB, BxB, FutaxFuta, BxPillowcase, and the occasional non-romantic game. It's tough to see who we aren't catering to. More importantly - it's not like there's some sort of central control center where we assign people projects. People work on what they want to, and that's a good thing.

Although it was poorly worded when I wrote it, that's what I meant. The community as a whole pretty much takes care of diversity simply by being being a diverse group itself.