I've read a bit, my guy, and when they're not minorities or poor, uneducated white folks of "poor breeding", they're some unspeakable force of the cosmos. Very rarely did he have a white villain who wasn't one of these things, and that was mostly his later works. Call of Cthulhu, and Shadow Over Innsmouth, however, DO contain this, and those are the biggest influences on this game.

Lovecraft's racism is well-documented though, not sure why y'all are so upset people bring it up.

Yeah, but immigration typically doesn't increase crime rates, which I believe is the point here. It's false rhetoric. There's nothing wrong with being concerned about security and sovereignty, but that doesn't excuse people using false talking points to make a case.

ShadowWolf712. Okay, that makes more sense to me. My issue with your OP was what seemed to be framing Lovecraft stories to have the villainous figures " almost exclusively" be "Native American, Black, or various other nonwhite races" whereas from where I see it it's these ancient evils that are the main villainous figures and that, at best, any humans (black, white or otherwise) are merely lackeys corrupted by said evils, some more corruptible or more inherently evil. That's my take-away from the greater cohesive elements of the Lovecraft universe. I'm not however debating that societal prejudices and whatnot play a part in his works because they certainly do.

No such thing as a free market anymore. I don’t know why they cave to “you types” but they do. Calling that free market to escape your book burning mentality is laughable. “Intolerance is not art” right? 🤣

If most people want something changed, or don't want something changed, or just a loud enough group of people want whatever it is to convince the people making it to make the change, that *is* the free market. Wether you like it or not. It's not suddenly tyrrany because you disagree, it's how capitalism is supposed to work.

Never mind I didn't even advocate for banning it. Or even changing it. I pointed out the fundamental problem with the idea that people wanting somethign changed is the same as people saying something should be banned. Because those are *not* the same statement.

No, that has nothing to do with the free market if you’re loud enough to change something before it even hits the market lol. Such a dumb thing to say. The other guy brought up free markets too, like that’s the canned response from offended book burners.

The free market would be battlefield 5 tanking after they caved to the “loud ones”. That game hit the market and it freely failed. The mob harassment campaigns have nothing to do with markets at all. It’s a book burning twitter seance and publishers are retarded for listening to them.

"The other guy brought up free markets too, like that’s the canned response from offended book burners."

Alright. So, first, I simply come here to contend your radical jump from this content WARNING that'll be displayed. Now? I'm being uncritically lumped in with book burners because--apparently--bringing up the free market is how we supposedly operate in order to carry out our plans in the shadows...or something. You see just how quickly this has devolved into bad faith arguments at this point?

And I'm not willing to follow Princess_Pilfer's argumentation, by the by. Not only b/c there's some questions that fall into the issue of self-censorship there, but also b/c that gets away from what I think this topic is about.

"There will be people that try to get it removed. That mob mentality is no different than a good old fashioned book burning."

But why should you be focusing on the extremes here rather than the standard itself? There really isn't this logical through-line that presenting a racism content warning leads to book burning as you think there is. By that logic, are you going to be howling in every N4G article once a game's ESRB rating & summary has been released? This extra bit of detail that--by all appearance--goes beyond the ESRB ratings is just more information for consumers to make decisions. Since this already has an M rating, the default assumption would be adults with cash making their own financial decisions. As of right now, I don't get why this needs to be cranked to 11.

A publisher/developer making a specific warning about Lovecraft's racism (which did seep into his creative work) doesn't seem like that much of a big deal; especially so when they still respect everything else about his work enough that they've decided to craft a game adaptation. But you're free to die on this hill if you'd like.

I’m not talking about the warning system at all. I wasn’t responding to the article I was responding to a comment. I’m talking about the mentality that made these warnings in the first place.

I’m also not trying to pretend that regulation is a free market system. Free markets have nothing to do with what any of us are taking about yet it’s brought up like a canned response. That’s all, I think it’s funny.