Story Mode Controversy --REDUX

[Riamus]

I'll leave it up to you to decide which one a player is likely to side with.

Most people play both sides, especially in a game that has good replayability. There are those who only play good or only play bad, but most don't do that beyond a preference to play one or the other the first playthrough in a game they'll play many times and then they'll often try the other to see the differences. After that, it's whichever gives them the best rewards (for them) or who they like better, which isn't necessarily related to them being good or bad. For example, if Rekt was considered "good", I would always play the bad side just to avoid Rekt. And I usually play the good side first in games, but will play the bad side the next time I play the game.

In any case, this isn't a game that needs a story, imo. I hope it will be limited to Navesgane, or at least have an option to disable it. I would do the story once just to see what the cause of the zombies is and to see what they decide to do with the story, but after that, I don't want to ever do the story again. I've said it before... no story, no matter how good, is going to be something you want to go through repeatedly with every game you play since we play so many games with 7D2D. It isn't like most games, where you aren't likely to play more than once or twice within a year or more. Those kinds of games can have a story and you're fine with it since you see it rarely. It's like reading a book again after a few years and still enjoying it. With this game, it would be like reading the same book over and over again, without a break. No, thanks.

 

[murky water]

The controversy was not about "shoehorning" a story into the existing game. (I never had a problem with that.) It was with the story itself.

i really, really REALLY hope this is never implemented. when there is almost no representation outside of the stereotypes adding one more to the pile is not welcome. i was in my thirties when i finally read a representation of native people that was just normal and not gross and that was only because it wasn't written from the outside. when your childhood is just "be white to be human" it feels a lot more grating to see one more injun story. i guess i am lucky fp rarely finishes things and this will likely spend another ten years on the back-burner :/

You can watch it right now on Paramount+.

you can also watch the 1950's peter pan movie too. something being commercially available is not an indication of moral or ethics.

 

[Roland]

you can also watch the 1950's peter pan movie too. something being commercially available is not an indication of moral or ethics.

I never said it was. I wasn't making a case for its morality or ethics. I was making a case for the lack of public outrage over a show reeking of Casino Indian stereotyping. I'm not sure what was controversial about "Peter Pan" but "Song of the South" was scrubbed from Disney streaming and park attractions. Again, I'm not saying that Disney turning its back on one of its classic movies is an indication of that movie's morality or ethics-- only an indication that Disney as a company was afraid to make it available any longer because of how it perceived the public would respond to how blacks were depicted in the movie. Paramount doesn't seem to be worried in the same way over "Longmire" and my point is that TFP probably doesn't need to be worried about it either for this game.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

I don't think there will be any backlash over it.

Of course there will be if the Duke is portrayed stereotypically, the very same as the controversy over an Atlanta-based baseball team's mascot will live in infamy. Just look at DAPL and the multi-tribe protest against it to ascertain all the reasons why. Indigenous tribes' sovereignty is consistently trampled when their cultures aren't being co-opted as opposed to celebrated; and, if TFP do plan to portray the Duke in a stereotypical light, it will only add fuel to the fire.

People who already view their fellow human beings as fellow human beings might have a difficult time understanding why social tensions are running so high, atm, but they are running high and that is a fact that can't be denied.

I can't claim to be Cherokee, though I have Cherokee ancestors, am familiar with the culture, and respect both the tribe and the culture immensely. I can't because I wasn't raised by the Cherokee. It only goes to follow I'd need a lot of help to portray the Cherokee faithfully. I'm glad most media has chosen to portray indigenous cultures faithfully to counter both the "noble and ignoble savages" narratives, portraying them as the human beings they are and -- if the Apache do take exception as a tribe -- TFP can't say they weren't forewarned. That's why I highly recommend an advisor be consulted to collaborate on any story and characterization including them. I'd only caution the advisor be vetted very carefully. We wouldn't want a repeat of the Star Trek Voyager incident, now would we?

Considering the setting, it makes perfect sense to include characters of all ethnicites present in the region. Were the Apache left out, that would be just as egregious an oversight as portraying them stereotypically. It's great the player can choose to play an indigenous person. That in itself is practically unheard of and I imagine indigenous peoples would be thrilled about that, but great care has to be taken to get portrayal of the Apache culture right, else the option to drop the Noah/Duke rivalry altogether and just present the mystery of what happened to turn Navezgane into zombie central might be considered.

 

[murky water]

I never said it was. I wasn't making a case for its morality or ethics. I was making a case for the lack of public outrage over a show reeking of Casino Indian stereotyping. I'm not sure what was controversial about "Peter Pan" but "Song of the South" was scrubbed from Disney streaming and park attractions. Again, I'm not saying that Disney turning its back on one of its classic movies is an indication of that movie's morality or ethics-- only an indication that Disney as a company was afraid to make it available any longer because of how it perceived the public would respond to how blacks were depicted in the movie. Paramount doesn't seem to be worried in the same way over "Longmire" and my point is that TFP probably doesn't need to be worried about it either for this game.

i think you and i are a bit misaligned? i wasn't accusing you personally of anything with my prior post i was just reinforcing the notion that a show causing outrage is not really going to be based on how racist it is because most people are very comfortable with racism as long as it does not interfere with their personal enjoyment of something


as for the peter pan controversy? well it wasn't considered a controversy for most people but it is super duper racist in the most cartoonish way

Spoiler: even the name of the song is pretty rough

the main part is the song "what makes the red man red" but there were several slurs that were casually thrown around as well as some really creepy sexualizing of the pre-pubecent tiger-lily that i'm not repeating here.

as for song of the south? it had intermittent theatrical releases until 1989 and they had the frog and rabbit roaming splash mountain for my entire childhood and they had an official blueray release in either 2000 or 2001. racist stuff gets run all the time by disney if it is still making money. i didnt even know they had stopped until miss goldberg made that unfortunate statement on it several years back at which point i found out eisner made the most limp mealy-mouth claim that their reason was about anything other than a lack of acceptable returns(while still giving the go-ahead to release the movie and songs in non-american markets).

for sure it is a really concerning thing to say "doesn't need to be worried about it" though i think unpacking that would be well outside of the perimeters of THIS forum.

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 2:54 AM

Of course there will be if the Duke is portrayed stereotypically,

if that painting IS of the duke i think we already know the answer.

 

[Jost Amman]

@Roland @meganoth @Crater Creator
I honestly don't understand why political discussions are banned, but racial discussions are still allowed

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

@Roland @meganoth @Crater Creator
I honestly don't understand why political discussions are banned, but racial discussions are still allowed

Afic, it's a discussion about cultural portrayal in media, with which TFP should be concerned, all things considered. It's no doubt difficult for moderators to determine what is verboten and what is not, especially when so many subjects overlap, but we're literally talking about story and characterization in 7DTD here.

 

[theFlu]

it is super duper racist in the most cartoonish way

This was so very convincing that I had to check the lyrics ... a "yo mamas ugly" and a "dude blushing for 'kissing' a woman" ... other than calling them "red" ... ? What?

 

[Jost Amman]

Afic, it's a discussion about cultural portrayal in media, with which TFP should be concerned, all things considered. It's no doubt difficult for moderators to determine what is verboten and what is not, especially when so many subjects overlap, but we're literally talking about story and characterization in 7DTD here.

You can discuss a game from many perspectives, racial, cultural, social, and political.
Why is this discussion about the racial bias allowed and not one (i.e.) about political aspects in the same game?

Spoiler

This discussion is also in some way political, by the way, because many points of view expressed here coincide with the Socialist and Marxist agenda. I'm a conservative for example (yes, boo hoo!), and I don't see the world through the racial lens at all (like Communists and Marxists do). So for me this whole discussion is simply about finding a solution to a problem they are creating in their minds.

The world is what it is, people are what they are. Judge them by their actions, not their skin color or heritage.
If your father was an awful human being, are you destined to be one as well? Don't think so.

In any case my question stands.

 

[Roland]

You would have a point if the bad guy had a role that could be held by anyone.

That's not the case. The villain is not an evil scientist, corrupt politician, or power-hungry sheriff who just happens to be Native American. Nobody other than a Native American can be a "Casino Indian."

I do have a point precisely because after the collapse of America and its laws and structure anybody CAN run and own a casino whoever has the might to take it— whatever their race.

You keep framing this in terms of current day America. That isn’t the setting of the game. Some dude took over the casino and used it as their HQ and they happen to be Native American. It could be anyone of any race who accomplished it. But disqualifying a particular race from being able to be considered is also racism.

If the backstory notes explicitly say that he owned the casino pre apocalypse then I agree that that should be changed to he was a member of the tribe that owned the casino. After the bombs fell and civilization went splat, he used his knowledge to step in and take over afterwards because nobody could stop him.

 

[InfiniteWarrior]

not one (i.e.) about political aspects in the same game

Hmm. I haven't seen any political aspects in the game, probably because there are no human NPCs in it (yet) other than the traders and they're glued to the spots they're standing on. (Ahhh, bliss?) No humans; no conflicts other than with creatures trying to eat you, atm, which very well could be why so many would prefer there be no story at all. We largely understand the world as we know it via stories. Likewise, game worlds. All the background stuff (Higashi experimentation, etc.) is so vague, it could mean anything from "mad scientists started the plague" to "awesome scientists tried to cure it". People can and will usually read themselves and their beliefs into pretty much everything, including their evaluations of you, whether they fit or not. (And I don't know about anyone else, but I very much dislike when people do that to me. I don't fit in other people's boxes. Never have; never will.)

Guaranteed, someone, somewhere will decide Super Corn is a statement (by TFP) on the evils of industrial genetic engineering of the foods we eat. They'll conclude the Jefflon Zuckergates Estate is a statement (by TFP) about the excesses of CEOs in the tech sector. More probably, TFP is poking fun at human inanity. People swear to this day that Fallout is a manifesto against capitalism when the creators themselves swear there's nothing anti-capitalist about it. Why do they do this? Best I can tell, politics is the new religion and a pretty Machiavellian one at that. I'm personally on the side of the comedians presently insisting that jokes about ethnicity and everything else are the icebreakers that allow us some relief from the mere fact that we're human and subject to all the foibles of being human. Live, love, laugh.

It's kind of sad, when you stop to think about it, that the only verboten subjects anywhere are politics and religion, supposedly because they start fights. If anyone were to ask me, they're actually verboten because the human race hasn't learned how to discuss much of anything maturely because the human race itself is self-centered and immature. I seem to remember a time when people trusted the experts to make all the hard decisions and just went about their daily lives happy as larks at the arrangement. Now that our institutions have proven themselves incapable of resolving the very problems they were designed to resolve, however, society itself has become completely lost and rudderless. Not surprisingly, we're all swimming in chaos as a result. "The ceremony of innocence is drowned."

 

[theFlu]

Some dude took over the casino and used it as their HQ and they happen to be Native American.

This is the thing that glitches for me too.. publicly traded companies are owned by "the public", yet everyone likes to look at their CEOs as the owner. Even if nominally a tribe owns a casino, they surely have a CEO or some other form of bigwig running the day-by-day. Power corrupts, look where ever you like.. pretending an Indian would be incorruptible is just a preference for the "noble savage"...

 

[Roland]

i think you and i are a bit misaligned? i wasn't accusing you personally of anything with my prior post i was just reinforcing the notion that a show causing outrage is not really going to be based on how racist it is because most people are very comfortable with racism as long as it does not interfere with their personal enjoyment of something

No worries. I didn’t take it as such. I wasn’t attacking back. I merely wanted to emphasize that for good or ill, the casino Indian trope doesn’t spark outrage on a critical level (though apparently the tomahawk chop does…) I agree that people will turn a blind eye in order to be able to enjoy entertainment. That was one of the defining characteristics of the 80s. lol.

as for the peter pan controversy? well it wasn't considered a controversy for most people but it is super duper racist in the most cartoonish way

Okay. I get it now. But it’s the same. That level of racial stereotyping just did not create enough of a public backlash to cancel those shows. Disney posted a disclaimer at the start of the movie and also for the crows at the start of Dumbo explaining the stereotypes were an unfortunate reality for that time in history but do not represent current beliefs of the company.

I wonder if the Beatles got mad when they watched the buzzards in Jungle Book….?

 

[Roland]

You can discuss a game from many perspectives, racial, cultural, social, and political.
Why is this discussion about the racial bias allowed and not one (i.e.) about political aspects in the same game?

Who says it isn’t? What political aspects of the game do you see? Is there an aspect of the upcoming story that is political or religious? We can allow discussions of that as long as it actually pertains to actual game content.

Let’s see…..Jen set up her trader outpost in a church. Run with it Jost.

 

[Jost Amman]

Let’s see…..Jen set up her trader outpost in a church. Run with it Jost.

Hmm...

For example, who was the President when the apocalypse happened?
I wanna know so that we can prevent electing him (or her) in the future (just to be safe).

The game is full of guns, but no NRA posters, why?
Do you have anything against the 2nd Amendment?

Why is the Blood Moon red?
Are you a commie?

/jk

 

[Roland]

For example, who was the President when the apocalypse happened?
I wanna know so that we can prevent electing him (or her) in the future (just to be safe).

It’s not in the game so cannot be discussed

The game is full of guns, but no NRA posters, why?
Do you have anything against the 2nd Amendment?

NRA posters are absent from the game so cannot be discussed.

Why is the Blood Moon red?

It’s blushing. Watch the song in Peter Pan.

 

[Dark Sun]

No worries. I didn’t take it as such. I wasn’t attacking back. I merely wanted to emphasize that for good or ill, the casino Indian trope doesn’t spark outrage on a critical level (though apparently the tomahawk chop does…) I agree that people will turn a blind eye in order to be able to enjoy entertainment. That was one of the defining characteristics of the 80s. lol.

Okay. I get it now. But it’s the same. That level of racial stereotyping just did not create enough of a public backlash to cancel those shows. Disney posted a disclaimer at the start of the movie and also for the crows at the start of Dumbo explaining the stereotypes were an unfortunate reality for that time in history but do not represent current beliefs of the company.

I wonder if the Beatles got mad when they watched the buzzards in Jungle Book….?

People need to remember that aside from some obvious examples (ex. Chick-fil-A), corporations don't care about anything other than one colour. It's not racial or a political party, it's green. In other words, money. While those in charge have their opinions on what is and what is not acceptable, the corp at large has no loyalty to anyone or anything other than what might affect their bottom lines, which is largely swayed by public opinion. I see people everywhere crying that "Disney has gone woke", when in reality if they have that grievance, turn towards society and not the faceless company that only cares about what's in your pocketbook. I would say the same to anyone actively participating in the "console wars" from yesteryear. Now, such beliefs are slowly becoming unprofitable, hence the gradual shift away from them.

It doesn't matter who you are, just remember that those serving you a product are not your allies nor your enemies, but the metaphorical equivalent of a tax collector, except one that chases political trends for profit.

 

[Kyoji]

I should be clear on this point.

As you could probably guess by my name (Karl), I am not a Native American. I do not claim to speak for Native Americans.

You just get offended for them. This isn't new in the world and there are many virtue signaling people who claim to speak for those who don't need you to speak for them.

As if the developers didn't have enough to deal with.

 

[Dark Sun]

You just get offended for them. This isn't new in the world and there are many virtue signaling people who claim to speak for those who don't need you to speak for them.

As if the developers didn't have enough to deal with.

Mhms. I don't mean to sound like a certain type of person (I try to stay neutral), but it's always a white guy who gets offended on the behalf of blacks, the Japanese, the Chinese, Mexicans, etc. to the point they are getting ticked off. If there are legitimate grievances (still subjective, as no one can speak for their race), let them talk about it. Judging by OP's pfp, if that's him, he's another white knight that just needs to get off his high horse. Just a casual observation is all.

 

[Kyoji]

I primarily think it's a slippery slope of the upmost concern. It starts with the design of the spitting zombie, now the entire story has to be race swapped to make a very tiny and loud fragment of society happy. Every little action going forward will be under a microscope and potentially even worse problems if the game gets review bombed by internet warriors as seen by games collaborating with Anita Sarkeesian. Either way the net benefit of this is practically non-existent and could potentially bring about worse repercussions not to say loss of development time over such nonsense. Political sensibilities aside, the juice just isn't worth the squeeze on this one.