"You know those cost savings for being digital? Those should have been passed on to consumers when things went digital," Tim Cain said. "They didn’t. The argument I hear is, 'Well, costs were rising in development, so they were balanced.' I don't think they were balanced."
"Nothing is off the table right now."
Discover how Sony Interactive Entertainment, Nintendo, and Microsoft continue to collaborate to improve player safety across our platforms.
Ex-Tripwire CEO John Gibson shares his 'Entertainment First' vision to capture the agenda-free magic of classics like Star Wars, Zelda, and Metroid.
Yes. Just make a good game instead of worrying it should make some kind of stupid social/political differences in the world... we've got enough of that in the real world. Games are places we can escape to and just have fun.
How about you make a game that’s important to you and the people who are interested in that buy it and the ones that don’t like it don’t have to buy it. Just because something bugs some people doesn’t mean there aren’t other people who it doesn’t bug. Someone’s hangups shouldn’t be other people’s problems.
Don’t want a game that features a political or cultural statement or an underrepresented group of people? Don’t buy it.
Not all of us just want vapid, mindless fantasy all the time. Sometimes we want something that represents us or means something. There’s nothing wrong with that. Look how many movies in the world have covered so many types of stories, people or historical controversies to huge successes. Games are no different.
The plot to remove representation or ideas and content that you dont approve of is an agenda within itself. Its also censorship. People need are trapped in this main- character syndrome where they believe that the world and all of its happens are fashioned for them alone.
"Don't buy it"
Exactly what people do.
And then big companies are reminded why if you want to make money you may not want to do things like villainize half your market. If you want to preach one side of an argument you're gonna lose people. At least do the Deus Ex/GTA thing and show the warts on both sides so everyone has something to agree with
On the flip side of that, good games can have characters of different ethnic and social backgrounds without thinking that some agendas are trying to be pushed. I've played many, many great games throughout my life with many different characters (male, female, white, people of color, even some animal characters) and loved them all simply for the story and entertainment they provided me while I escaped into those worlds.
That’s not possible.
Being a child doesn’t remove the political points of OLD GAMES, we were just kids. In fact, older media was decidedly more political than some of the cowardly, childish efforts we have today.
This is precisely why we are still to get that Splinter Cell remake. We can’t have a fun Splinter Cell game with AAA graphics because a few virgins don’t want “politics in their games.”
Keep gaming free of nonsense. Agenda pushing in social media age has gotten worst
"While our first game is faith-based"
Yeah you guys want to get rid of all the politics and play a nice Southern Baptist game. We get it.
He should follow his own words, then.
*** That changed around two years ago, when he started consulting for Bible X, the studio behind the Christian-based game project Gate Zero. Last month, Gibson, through his recently established publisher Templar Media, acquired the developer.***
Not sure there's anything more political in history than religion.
But his statement is also an agenda. Hope people are intelligent enough to know that.
I fail to see how representing actual underrepresented or making them feel included is an “agenda”. This is an extremely self centered selfish viewpoint. Those actual underrepresented people just want to be recognized as valid. The privileged majority who are always represented take that for granted and can’t deal with the fact that “other” types of people or views exist. Inclusion or awareness isn’t an agenda. It’s representing reality and making those “other” people or stories be seen and align with actual reality.
There are literally thousands and thousands of games to choose from, and if you are annoyed that some have cultural or topical relevance, that’s your problem and you don’t have to buy them. Meanwhile other people who want that actually have games that speak to them. So sick of this “my way or the highway” attitude.
And there are plenty of games out there, if that privileged majority have an issue or don’t want a game based on cultural relevance. Pick up a Switch. Most games are g-rated, noncontroversial cartoons with stories fit for tweens. No reality to get mad at.
Replies(2)It's always me me me me me with you lot. There's a difference between representation and forcing it for the sake of forcing something to a very very loud but very small minority.
You really are only proving their point with this sort of response to the idea of people feeling included in some games versus the plethora of games without it.
We need to define what "forcing" is because I've seen people say things like Aloy being female in Horizon is pushing an agenda or catering to a "very very loud but very small minority" before.
@z2g
I personally think you've nailed it here.
For decades, wether in film or music, there had been ONE primary target group.
And if you're looking further, even in economy, laws, courts or any other area there had been only one target group.
While others, let's be real, were surpressed.
It's "funny" though - why do we all think personalities like David Bowie, Mick Jagger, Freddy Mercury, etc., have had such a huuuge impact on cultures and society? Because they were 1:1 depicts of the Demon Slayer or the Duke?
No, because they were different. Because we all are different.
The only people time and time again that are complaining, whining and moaning about everything (while highly likely even been a fan of Queen or something) are prejudiced people.
Are people that "But it's never been any different, and I want it to stay that way!".
There's nothing highly hidden here. It's always been the same. After decades, even centuries of rules written by and for the "one primary target group", they are now the loudest that complain & moan.
Y'all could also, ya know, just not buy games you feel have an agenda? This constant bitching coming from all these whiney men every time they see a game that isn't catering to them specifically is tiring. They latch themselves onto these games and throw endless amounts of harassment as if there aren't another thousand games releasing before/around/after. I'm usually outspoken when it comes to forced diversity in games, but the issue here is you're all bigoted as hell and need to learn to be a little less offended. Y'all become the snowflakes you mocked so much lol.
This guy is one of the biggest most delicate snowflakes out there, I'm sure he'll be crying on Tucker Carlson or Fox "News" again soon.
@christopher cater to and include are two very different things. Played most of the games you mentioned and had no issue with any of em because they just include it. I have no issue with inclusion of that, but if in the next god of war, Kratos would all of a sudden hyperfocus on being a strong independent man or a hypermasculine one, I would give them shit for it as well. It has nothing to do with the inclusion of x or y group, but about the integrity of the game.
@inverno stop putting words in my mouth . It's actually the opposite of what you say, I said there can be no conversation because as soon as you criticize them, a whole angry mob comes at you and tries to cancel you. Thankfully it's become less and less over time and people actually realize now they can voice their opinion without having the fear of losing their job.
You really can't see that a lot of companies are now backpeddalling about the woke bs? They finally realize making your product worse to cater to a group who doesn't buy your product anyway is terrible.
Who was crying about kingdom come deliverance, Stellar Blade and the first descendant? White Hetero men Or leftards?
Leftards but those games still went on to release and become financially and critically successful. This dood, who was a CEO, went on social media to voice an opinion that at the time was controversial. Just cause you have freedom of speech and expression doesn't mean you hafto always voice your opinions publicly. He had to step down because it was more about the company than just him. Now he's back talking bout "unrepresented majority", as if there aren't different audiences to cater to. Since people from both sides can't seem to escape getting fired for voicing opinions then I guess everyone's got to equally face the consequences of their inability to shut up.
One of the most politically charged movies in existence. They can pretend it's all about space wizards with swords but the space nazis are still in the movies and they're still the bad guys. It's ironic as hell.
More evidence that if the agenda feels legitimate within the story's world, people don't even notice that it is an agenda and they don't complain.
As ever, this is a misguided expression of the speaker's issue. While of course there are some games (pure puzzle games, etc) that have no agenda, any game with a narrative is conveying some type of message. What people who say they don't like "woke" or "politics in games" actually mean is that they don't like hamfisted, poorly written narratives/characters that are thin veneers for modern political messages that feel out of place in the game's universe. It's why all these people complain about the Veilguard and not Baldur's Gate 3. They both have "woke" characters but in BG3 they feel like they belong in the universe, while in the Veilguard they just feel like generic fantasy skins for modern American 20-somethings.
It’s crazy how digital games cost publishers far less to release — no discs to press, no cases to print, no shipping or retail markups — yet the price is exactly the same as physical copies. Those savings were never passed down to consumers. It’s the same pattern we saw during COVID-19, when companies and CEOs blamed “supply chain disruptions” to justify price hikes. But when those supply chains were restored, did anyone lower their prices? Of course not — in many cases, they went even higher.
The truth is, consumers rarely push back. People keep paying whatever’s asked, and that’s exactly why companies keep testing the limits. They’ll keep raising prices, cutting corners, and offering less for more until enough people finally decide to speak with their wallets
F digital. Make it cost more than physical
Only thing passed onto customers is whatever these companies don't want coming out their pockets. But broke people love defending companies.
Companies saving money, and NOT reducing their prices for consumers? In this day and age??
The thing is it’s simple bait and switch, the problem is there’s people still out there that think these companies aren’t designed to screw you of as much money as possible. These companies HAVE to make more profit for shareholders holders year on year. That’s the legal pursuit of a capitalist market. Which is why it’s a global cancer to society and why it cannot possibly get better. It can only possibly get worse. That’s how it’s designed from the ground up.