The Division studio believes being openly political in games is bad for business - Sensationalist Headlines

Nope, many people found that to be a fault.

Literally every review from mainstream outlets were "confused" about it not being about killing stereotypical hicks and cousin-fuckers and sticking it to Trump.

Literally every review sure They are at least the 4 first on Google (barring Metacritic who gives it an 81). Now they all seem like mainstream outlets and 3 of them are praising it, while Polygon is a bit annoyed by the lack of nuances in the game. And the same really goes for the reviews on Steam. The rest are basically the same (but those I've just skimmed.) That just makes it seem like one of those controversies that don't really exist. In other words generalizing "today" wile not backing it up is dumb.

For the Far Cry 5 thing I only remember the Gamespot video and I haven't heard anything about the Spider-Man police thing. I don't think these are very common. I'm also not sure what critics talking about video games had to do with video games themselves being political or not. If critics are complaining about these things it implies that the developers are doing the opposite of pandering. If literally every review from mainstream outlets were doing this then it should be easy to cite one or two.

The problem with Far Cry 5 isn't that no one says "fuck drumpf". The problem is that the game is so desperate to run away from any comparison to the increasingly extreme and radicalized religious right that it ends up turning what begins as a very serious story into a cartoon farce. It's an inherently political premise that's sabotaged in an attempt to not offend anyone. And honestly, I wouldn't care if there wasn't that inconsistency. If it was a comical farce the whole way through, then that'd be fine. What's frustrating is that it feels like a compromise.

I liked the way the Polygon (third link) article worded it It’s a timely story that could at least try to address the polarized nature of current American politics, or talk about the issues inherent in a country that seems to worship firearms. But I never saw anything that hinted at how these cultists were radicalized. And their ultimate goal, revealed at the end of the game, undercuts any grand statement.

Politics in media isn't bad. Media being used as a platform to tell you what's right and what's wrong is bad. Political media just presents you with a scenario that's in some way comparable to a political topic. The Witcher is an intensely political story, it's just that it never tells you what conclusion you should draw. Which no good story ever will. A story that tells you how to feel is like a joke that tells you when to laugh. Neither is enjoyable.

You're underplaying the reach game review websites have, and the fact that their reviews do indeed resonate with a considerable amount of people. Here's more, since you neglected to look past the first 4 you saw. Far Cry 5 wasn’t a game for the Trump era, but it tried to be on.. https://theoutline.com/post/4042/far-cry-5-review-trump?zd=1&zi=ngfj7ewf 'Far Cry 5' Review 'Far Cry 5' Tries to Do It All, but Fails to Be Much of Anything and there's a lot more where that came from. All I said was that it was a common narrative that people shared. I'm not playing it as some sort of controversy, I'm simply stating that many review sites and thus many of their readers found that Far Cry 5 had wasted potential because it wasn't about Trump.

I didn't play FC5 so I can't really comment either way but I appreciate you doing the leg work to gather the links. I just honestly hadn't heard of any of the things you said were common. Compared to the Wolf II and Battlefield V nontroversies at least.

"It feels like a game that started out loosely based on then-contemporary politics and right-wing splinter groups; got derailed by the real world’s hard, sudden turn into political catastrophe; and ended up as a mess of “topical” buzzwords." like, it'd take me a while to go through all of these, but just skimming through the first one, this is exactly what I'm talking about the point the author's making isn't "you don't blow up the wall or smash a TV with a trump speech playing on it so it's bad", it's that the game is so desperate for people not to compare it to modern politics that it ends up being a weird, surreal, farce.

I literally came here to post this. and also to say that politics are literally interwoven with every single aspect of human culture and society. You want a game about a war? Well guess what ultimately started that war. You want a game about a post apocalyptic wasteland? how did the world fall into such a bleak state? Who is responsible for it? Even a series as cartoonish and silly as Borderlands has a setting steeped in satire about intergalactic mega corporations. When people say "I don't want to hear about politics!" I just feel like they are saying they either don't want to hear anything that challenges their opinions- or they don't want to think about anything at all.

I Think games like far cry 5 are a good example of why trying too hard to avoid making a stance is bad It has all the imagery but is too afraid to make a statement and comes off as hollow.

Not neglect, they just didn't show up. Anyway thank you for the links. Though your first article is about the lack of nuance The Verge’s own Andrew Webster called it a game that “creates the illusion that it has something to say, then stubbornly refuses to say anything.” is basically the sentiment behind that article. Your second article seems to basically agree with the first one. Third one seems eerily similar to the Polygon article from before. Though none of them talks about "not being about killing stereotypical hicks and cousin-fuckers" and none of them are about not saying enough about Trump but more about how they mention Trump. btw all of the articles (sans the gq one) are quite good.

Why can there never be any escape from it though? What if people just want to enjoy media for the sake of escapism and relaxation, i.e. the entire point of videogames and most recreational media, without being bombarded by politics? Not to mention the double standard that applies here, I highly doubt you or anybody else supporting the politicization of video games would be as enthusiastic if the next Far Cry had an editorial standpoint that genuinely endorsed Trumpism or something else you disagreed with.

again, it isn't about including a bunch of preachy dialogue telling the player what to think about politics. It's about not taking things out because you're afraid their inclusion would make people upset. It's about allowing the vatican facsimile in your fantasy game to be evil without being worried about upsetting catholics. It's about allowing the nazis in your game about nazis to resemble actual nazis. It's about making media that isn't bland, featureless gruel designed to upset as few people as possible.

Oh I agree with that. If you want to put politics in your game and make a statement then yeah I agree, go for it and ignore who you might upset. I just meant I don't think videogames or any form of media has any kind of obligation to comment on politics and "tackle issues" when its not the point of the product. Basically just saying there's nothing wrong with being neutral and just making entertainment.

Something important in writing is "show, don't tell." Don't tell me why I should feel bad about an event in the story, show me the context, the characters, etc. and allow me to experience an emotion of my own volition. Don't tell me why someone is wrong or evil, show me their actions, motivations, and outcomes, and let me come to my own conclusion. People don't generally like to be told what to believe or feel. When a game is hamfisted in its message or themes it falls flat, mainly because the game is expecting the player to agree with it and the player isn't convinced, so there's a disconnect. Far Cry 5 wanted me to feel bad about my actions in the ending, but basically yelled at me to feel bad. Meanwhile earlier it was showing me the complete opposite in gameplay and other story moments, so the ending was shit and the message was incoherent. Far Cry tried to be apolitical but it really didn't have a message once they removed politics from the table, yet the writers still felt the need to have some emotional introspective conclusion without building it up. I think when people say, "keep politics out of games", they mean politics as the game lobbying them to believe or feel what it tells them, and people are tired of being told what to believe and what to feel. Games can get the same messages across without acting like a pretentious snob; the delivery needs to be nuanced, subtle, and genuine, and they need to show, not tell. There's a reason Spec Ops was praised for it's twist and Far Cry was panned, both had similar messages but only one pulled it off (although it did get a bit preachy and could have been handled better).

Huh. Any examples?

Metal Gear is political as fuck and not in a way that feels overly topical or hamfisted. Same with Deus Ex. I think that's the right way to do it. Basing your game off of current events is a great way to make it age like milk.

I would hardly describe a tom clancy game as apolitical. Mario is apolitical, tom clancy games are not.

Your post history says otherwise. And that's the point really. Virtually everyone that wants political discourse in interactive fiction doesn't actually want political discourse, they want 2 dimensional morality plays that a third grader could write. racism is bad guys No shit. If this is far as you can get in broadening someone's horizons you need to find another profession to be in cause this is pre day one shit, this is the shit you're expected to hit boot camp with. Do you really think someone like Mitch McConnell is unaware of what his actions and mindset perpetuate, do you think every time Frank Miller has an arab villain and no arab hero or even supporting character he's somehow in need of a time out teaching moment? Come the fuck on. Show, don't tell. Show what racism does in the venue itself, show what bias brings to a community and paradigm, and you do that with tailoring the world itself to react to it, not cardboard morality monologs bu plucky special npc cherry picked for your junior high marketing campaign.

I'm really only against politics in games if they try to push specific real world political views with the medium, even if that view may line up with what I agree with. However, that's just my personal stance, and as such, should not stifle the creation of such forms of art in this medium. People should be free to express what they wish, just as I'm free to not partake in their expression. Politics in general though is impossible to remove from the medium. At a very basic level, just about most games have politics in them. We're talking basic shit like sides with differing viewpoints, assisting or hindering groups of characters that may share a similar mindset. Characters in those groups who may even have conflicting views to the rest on the principles of their groups. It goes on and on. Even staples of the medium, like Mario, have at the very least very basic ground level generalized politics in them. It's simply something that can't be avoided, only made more broad in an attempt to not paint any specific viewpoints. As such, really, the classic saying applies here. If you don't like it, don't buy it. I'm not saying that in the typical snobby sense, I'm saying you're totally free to exercise your rights as a consumer to support what you want and not support what you don't want. The medium has so many choices and so many forms of expression, so there will always be other avenues.

what if it's a political simulation game?

no politics allowed