1093: ‘Problematic’ is This Year’s ‘Entitled’

Page_1Remember last year when everyone was busily calling each other “entitled” for complaining about stuff like the Mass Effect 3 ending and Capcom’s absurd DLC-on-disc policies? Ah, good times. They were fun, weren’t they? Particularly when members of the press who should really know better starting insulting their audience. But let’s leave that aside for now, because now it’s 2013, and we have bigger fish to fry.

Now, you see, the fashionable thing to do is to declare something “problematic”. I can’t quite work out what irks me so about this word — in all likelihood it’s simply its overuse — but it really does bug me.

The declaration of something as “problematic” usually ties in with the growing trend of guilt-ridden white straight cis men to want to champion the poor downtrodden parts of society — the women, the transsexuals, the homosexuals, the people of non-white ethnic backgrounds — and show themselves to be enlightened enough to stand up to the privileged of the world. Trouble is, a white straight cis man standing up for these groups only helps to reinforce that perceived “weakness” in many ways — and in worst-case scenarios, it starts to look a bit like bandwagon-jumping.

Such is the case with many of these things that have been declared “problematic” in recent months. A while back we had that beyond-stupid Hitman: Absolution trailer, more recently we had CD Projekt Red’s actually quite excellent Cyberpunk 2077 trailer, and today we had the announcement of Dead Island Riptide’s ridiculous “Zombie Bait” special edition. Leaving aside Cyberpunk 2077 for a moment, which is something of a different issue, both Hitman: Absolution and Dead Island Riptide are obviously incredibly stupid marketing ploys designed for shock value, little more. I find it honestly hard to believe that either Square Enix or Deep Silver genuinely want to condone violence against women or misogyny in general, but that is what they’re being accused of with these “problematic” marketing materials — in the case of Dead Island, within minutes of the images hitting the Interwebs.

The thing is, all the shouting about how “problematic” these things are actually just plays right into the marketers’ hands. For every table-thumping opinion piece that decries these things as the most awful thing ever dreamed up by a game’s marketing team, there will be at least a few readers who will think “well hang on, actually I’m quite interested in that now,” whether or not they actually admit to it in public. The amount of “OMG THIS IS AWFUL” stuff floating around about Dead Island Riptide’s bloody torso is only really serving to make people more aware of the game’s striking, gross (and Europe/Australia-exclusive) special edition; the hoo-hah over the Hitman: Absolution trailer likely helped raise awareness of the game in the run-up to its release to a considerable degree, and it had been all but forgotten by most people by the time the game actually came out.

In short, they’re stupid and in poor taste, but all they are are marketing ploys, little more. And they’re doing their job admirably — both games now have considerably higher visibility than they once had. As they say, all publicity is good publicity. If you really want to punish them, don’t provide them with any coverage whatsoever.

The Cyberpunk 2077 trailer is a little more complex to discuss. Taken out of context, it could be seen as a representation of brutality against a sex worker — until it pans out and she reveals her MASSIVE FUCKING ROBOT SCYTHE BLADES, that is — but taken in the context of the original Cyberpunk 2077 source material from the ’80s, it is, to my knowledge anyway, entirely in keeping with the aesthetic and atmosphere of that which it is based on. I observed some lengthy discussions about this on both Facebook and Google+ recently, and now that I know the context, it’s clear that this trailer is entirely appropriate for the setting. One may argue that the use of a scantily-clad woman is somewhat unnecessary, and you might be right about that, but that doesn’t mean that this is suddenly a huge violence against women issue. It’s a stylistic choice; little more — a subversion of audience expectations. “A woman being abused by the police… oh wait, no, she’s actually some sort of hideous mechanical monster with very little humanity remaining.” (Spoilers.)

You could also argue that the requirement to be familiar with the source material before being able to recognise the trailer for what it is is something of a failing of the marketing, but then Cyberpunk 2077 was always likely to appeal to a very specific, niche audience — those who remembered the original tabletop RPG — anyway, so is there really anything wrong in catering to that specific, niche audience rather than attempting to make something bland, unremarkable and mainstream?

My point, essentially, is that by shouting and screaming about how “problematic” these things are, you’re fuelling the fire. You’re helping the things that you hate. You’re making people aware of them, and not in the way you probably intend. It’s a catch-22, really. If you say nothing, you might feel as if you’re tacitly condoning things that you don’t agree with; if you say something, you actually end up bringing it to a much wider audience, many of whom may become defensive when confronted with your viewpoints that counter their feelings.

The key thing, I think, is moderation. The trouble with the number of things that have been declared “problematic” recently is that it’s losing its impact. We’re apparently supposed to find so much stuff “offensive” these days that it’s getting difficult to keep track — and who are the people who get to say what is and isn’t offensive, anyway? Following the release of the Dead Island Riptide pictures today, for example, I saw a variety of comments from female gamers (as in, gamers who just happen to be female, not girls who make a big deal out of the fact they play games or specifically identify as “girl gamers”) along the lines that it really didn’t bother them and that they just found this sort of thing rather childish and amusing.

That, to me, is a more healthy attitude to take. All of the outrage I’ve seen today has been from men — always the same men, too, so much so that any time something like this comes up it’s incredibly predictable who will be the first to jump on their virtual soapbox. It’s easy to play the “champion of feminism” from behind a computer keyboard, but I have to question how many of these self-appointed arbiters of taste and decency have actually done anything beyond pen an angry blog post (yes, just like this one, I know) to help make life better for these groups they’re supposedly standing up for.

Dead Island’s bloody tits are a horrid thing you probably wouldn’t want on your mantlepiece. Hitman: Absolution‘s nuns trailer was an exercise in how ridiculous a trailer they could get away with. I’m not defending either of them, because they’re both shit, let’s not beat around the bush. But I really don’t believe they’re symptomatic of anything more than marketing departments that are highly adept at taking advantage of “shock value”. And attempting to make these into anything more than that will achieve little more than starting arguments that have little value to the real concerns, which are a much more complex set of sociological issues.

I like women and have never, ever thought of a woman as someone “inferior” to me. The thought of perpetrating violence against a woman in reality is, to me, abhorrent, but then the thought of perpetrating violence against a man is also, to me, abhorrent. But then I liked the Cyberpunk 2077 trailer, too. Does that make me an awful, hideous misogynist?

No, of course it doesn’t. But what do I know? I like Hyperdimension Neptunia.

#oneaday Day 871: A Change of Heart

20120608-021801.jpg

It’s not easy to change your own opinions, for any reason. It’s even harder to change it when someone else makes a convincing argument as to why you are wrong and therefore a big dumb-dumb poopy-head. But sometimes it’s something you have to do in order to move with the times.

I have two very different issues in mind for which I’ve encountered the above concept. I’ll tackle them in order of difficulty to comment on.

First up is mobile gaming.

Last year, I wrote this post. In it, I described how I thought the supposed pressure from Nintendo’s investors for the Japanese giant to start developing for smartphones rather than its own proprietary hardware might not actually be a terrible idea. I actually still don’t think it’s an awful idea, but after a year of reflection, observation and immersion in the mobile gaming industry, it’s clear that what I describe and suggest in that post isn’t going to happen.

For all some iOS developers’ attempts to take the iPhone and iPad seriously for gaming purposes, there are at least ten times as many developers churning out free-to-play or quick-hit casual games. For every developer who is up front about the cost of their app and refuses to nickel-and-dime the player with additional in-app purchases, at least ten times as many incorporate some sort of means of endless monetization, be it an “energy” system, a means for players to buy in-game currency without earning it or the facility to unlock content without having to progress naturally through the game.

I don’t begrudge these developers their income, of course — games cost money to make, and every developer wants to make it big with their titles. But, unfortunately, the prevalence of such business models in the mobile gaming space makes it all but impossible for the “core” gaming community to take it seriously. As much as many of us moan about grinding for levels or money in games, a lot of us secretly quite enjoy it — it provides us with “war stories” about how we played Mahjong for six hours straight in Yakuza 2 in order to be able to afford a fancy dress to give to a girl, or how we accumulated fifteen bajillion souls in Demon’s Souls only to die and then die again on the way back to retrieving them, losing them all forever.

In short, the effort and personal sacrifice involved in accomplishing feats in some of these games is rendered meaningless if someone can just come along and pay ten quid to bypass all the pain and suffering. Sure, it’s convenient, but it renders achievements meaningless — particularly if the game’s monetization strategy features “pay to win” items, whereby players can pay real money in order to gain a significant in-game advantage, be it the ability to “continue” after death without score penalty or simply acquiring powerful new equipment.

What this means is that “core” gamers as a community don’t take mobile gaming seriously, which means that when developers do come along wanting to do something serious and non-exploitative, they often get ignored — particularly if their game is seen as “expensive” compared to the myriad free and 69p apps out there. If you want a recent example of this in action, just consider the Kickstarter campaign for Republique that I wrote about here. Despite starting as an effort to get “triple-A” games on iOS, the team behind the project gradually had to accept that this mission statement wasn’t going to get them the funding that they wanted, and eventually had to expand and promise PC and Mac versions. Even then, it looked for a long time like they weren’t going to make it.

Anyway. I was wrong. I accept that. Mobile gaming is its own thing, and that’s cool. I will continue to appreciate it when a developer treats me as a player rather than a customer (or worse, cash cow) and provides me with deep, meaningful, worthwhile experiences on iOS, but I’m no longer holding my breath for it to be the next big thing in portable gaming — at least not for the “core” audience. There is still a place for dedicated handhelds.

Now for the second issue. I kind of don’t want to talk about this much because there’s been a lot of angry table-thumping surrounding it in recent weeks. There are, too, a lot of very vocal commentators on the subject and I really don’t want to attract their ire — firstly, because that is by no means my intention, and secondly, because I’ve seen people really get laid into as a result of such arguments.

I am, of course, talking about gender issues and the question of whether or not the video games industry constitutes a rape culture.

Some context, first. Apologies to those whom the following offends, but it’s necessary to include it for context. (NSFW, duh.)

This trailer for the upcoming game Hitman Absolution made a lot of people very angry, for various reasons. The ridiculous nun disguises covering impractical porn-star dominatrix outfits. The question of how exactly a nun conceals a rocket-launcher inside her habit. The fact that this really didn’t look like the Hitman series people knew and loved.

By far the biggest concern, though, was the violence towards women depicted in the trailer.

I am not going to get into the broader discussion of whether or not this is indicative of a rape culture here as, to be frank and honest with you, I do not know enough about the subject and therefore feel ill-qualified to comment on it.

What I can discuss, however, is how my own thought processes went.

My initial reaction to the trailer was simply “WTF”. This was shortly followed by “that’s clearly sexist and unnecessary”, and I commented as such on Twitter around the time it was emerging. My opinion was that the trailer was the result of a horny marketing department making deliberately sexually-provocative promotional material in order to get people talking about the game. On that note, it certainly worked.

I thought little more of it for a while, until articles like this one started to appear, claiming that the trailer was indicative of a larger problem — the trailer was, to paraphrase Brendan’s piece, not simply sexist, but evidence of a culture that normalised violence against women, and specifically sexual violence. In short, a rape culture by its very definition.

I had no idea what “rape culture” meant when I saw the initial discussions surrounding this trailer. My initial reaction, like many others, was to assume that “rape culture” in fact meant “directly endorsing rape”. Despite being conscious of the fact that I had publicly spoken out against the trailer, the accusations flying around and the increasing anger of commenters on the subject — on both sides — made me feel deeply uncomfortable and, yes, defensive. No-one likes to be told that something they care deeply about has such an odious undercurrent, after all.

But I stepped back for a moment and considered what was going on. This was clearly a hot-button issue for a lot of people, and one that I knew wading into with ill-informed opinions would be desperately, desperately unwise. I’d already seen a few weeks previously that a friend who had inadvertently ventured into a similar discussion got very publicly torn a new one (a little unfairly, I feel — though that’s an altogether different story) as he attempted to discuss the matter.

So here’s what I did: I stepped away. I read through the various angry tweets, blog posts and articles with a degree of detachment, attempting to understand where these people were coming from and why those who were saying “it’s no problem, what’s the big deal?” were pissing them off so much. I read up a little on what “rape culture” as a term actually meant.

And I came out of it feeling differently to the defensiveness I felt before. I already knew there was a problem with sexism in the industry, but now I felt I had an increased (though by no means comprehensive) understanding of the issue. I am aware that there are still things I do not understand about issues of feminism, gender, sexuality, rape culture and cultural norms — people spend years studying these things, after all — but I am willing to at least learn about these subjects before sticking my oar into a debate I am currently ill-qualified to have. I am also aware that many of the commenters who feel so passionately about this issue are not, as might first appear, condemning the entire industry and everyone involved in it as sexist, misogynist perpetuators of a rape culture, because gross generalisations are never helpful.

Let’s get off the specifics because, as I’ve said several times, I don’t want to get into that particular discussion right now.

The key issue is that a little consideration and reflection goes a long way. Knee-jerk, immediate, passionate, emotional and ill-informed reactions might feel good in the short term, but often they leave you looking like a jackass. I’m glad that I stepped back and considered the way I felt about the discussion surrounding this issue — and why — before even thinking about jumping in and potentially making a twat of myself.

It pays to have flexible opinions, a willingness to educate yourself and, yes, the ability to admit you were wrong (and understand why), in short. That’s not to say that you should blindly follow the herd — quite the opposite, in fact. You should take the time to explore an issue, find out as much as possible and gather sufficient information for you to be able to accurately decide whether or not your initial reaction was, in fact, correct.

If it was — in your opinion, anyway — then you’ll be well-equipped to argue your case. And if it wasn’t, it’s important to be humble enough to admit it.