Seriously how dose inclusion trigger people?

[unseenclass]

I will never for the life of me understand this. Like just adding the option to have your own character look and represent who you are. Adding that option is offensive to people? And don't even try the whole they are shoving it down our throats crap. Has Bioware even once themselves boasted about anything in the character creator? Or have people mentioned it and then you all went crazy?

Sorry just had to rant for a little. thanks for reading.

[AllyourKitty]

I think the issue at steak is the that many people feel that the inclusion is mandated and follows the same patterns, when you try to regulate art with checklists and requirements the creative part of the art suffers.

This is of course unfortunate especially for the peoples jobs which are now at steak but products which have been creatively compromised not selling well is part of the corrective action which is needed to hopefully return to better times and better products.

[unseenclass]

Originally posted by AllyourKitty:

I think the issue at steak is the that many people feel that the inclusion is mandated and follows the same patterns, when you try to regulate art with checklists and requirements the creative part of the art suffers.

This is of course unfortunate especially for the peoples jobs which are now at steak but products which have been creatively compromised not selling well is part of the corrective action which is needed to hopefully return to better times and better products.

So how is adding a scar to your chest compromising the art of the game? If they added more face scars would that be a waste of the art departments time? Would it compromise the artistic vision of the game since they spent so much time adding a face scare that some scary liberal forced them to draw?

[Verdeth]

the so called inclusion, is not inclusive, there is no representation for people with a healthy body shape reason for that is to dei, dei aims to remove all controversial edges, so people dont feel offended. if you want proof take a look at the sliders.

i assume the reason for this is due to a bioware shill (eddie) praising the character creator to heavens, or ign saying its amazing. pick your poision. fact remains bioware choose someone outside of their company to boasts about the game for hype.

[MrQun]

I personally don't care if a game is inclusive just so long as it makes sense and that it doesn't negatively affect the story. But by simply ticking off check boxes for different races/ sex etc is just virtue signalling and it is quite patronising. In fact I know a few gay people (my brother included) and they all tell me that they are sick and tired of all of this "woke" BS.

[unseenclass]

Originally posted by MrQun:

I personally don't care if a game is inclusive just so long as it makes sense and that it doesn't negatively affect the story. But by simply ticking off check boxes for different races/ sex etc is just virtue signalling and it is quite patronising. In fact I know a few gay people (my brother included) and they all tell me that they are sick and tired of all of this "woke" BS.

This argument makes no sense whatsoever. Simply ticking off check boxes for different races/sex? So if you are making a character creator where is the line? Do you add an option so a character can look Asian? Is that to much? How about Indian or native american? Where is this line that I stopped adding options and am not just being condescending to minoritys? Also I know a gay person too and they like "woke" BS. So now who do we balive?

[DarkXessZ]

I dont play the game to have my representation. I play the game to be immersed in the world that is being created that has it's own lore and rules. Seeing random RL ideology and politics brought into the game breaks that immersion. Also their rules is inclusive for "their own ideology" but not inclusive for thee.

[Mikebeez]

Originally posted by unseenclass:

Originally posted by MrQun:

I personally don't care if a game is inclusive just so long as it makes sense and that it doesn't negatively affect the story. But by simply ticking off check boxes for different races/ sex etc is just virtue signalling and it is quite patronising. In fact I know a few gay people (my brother included) and they all tell me that they are sick and tired of all of this "woke" BS.

This argument makes no sense whatsoever. Simply ticking off check boxes for different races/sex? So if you are making a character creator where is the line? Do you add an option so a character can look Asian? Is that to much? How about Indian or native american? Where is this line that I stopped adding options and am not just being condescending to minoritys? Also I know a gay person too and they like "woke" BS. So now who do we balive?

If you do not understand, then you are part of the problem.

[Mysti_Fogg]

There's a couple things at play. One is specific to Dragon Age and the other is specific to American society at the moment.

Dragon Age specific:

People are sensitive to "does this make sense in the world that has been built?" And I don't disagree with them that that is a concern. The characters in the world should sound part of that world, not our world.

So nonbinary inclusion is difficult, for example, not because nonbinary people wouldn't exist, but because they wouldn't use that vocabulary. Also high odds that they'd have some culture specific ideas of what that means and how they should identify themselves to others in the community. A writer can write something that would be inclusive, but it's maybe not going to hit in a way that nonbinary people would like because it doesn't have familiar vocabulary and may highlight issues that aren't facing that community today because the issues don't exist in the fantasy world for that kind of character. Meanwhile, if the writer were to write using modern vocabulary there's a good chance of pissing off fans or people who just want to be in a different world because why is a fantasy character using those words.

You can do it. You can write in all kinds of inclusivity. But it requires a lot of mental work thinking about how society (or multiple societies since there are different countries) will react to things.

American Society problem:

Fantasy and scifi franchises in particularly have been gathering bad reputations for burning fans through forcing diversity into properties. We need more black characters? Let's race swap someone. We need more gay characters? Let's swap around someone's sexuality. We need more female characters? we'll just swap genders.

If a property has an insane number of iterations, like, for example, Spider-man, you can get away with it a little bit. There's a whole Spider-verse full of alternate spider people. Having alternate spider people doesn't mean that Peter Parker is ruined, and can provide for some interesting alternate universe story telling of what could have happened or how people could have been.

But then you have something like The Witcher, which oddly enough HAS a good background for inclusivity because people just go dropped on their world willy nilly from another world during the conjunction of the spheres. But they wanted to make Ciri black originally, despite her being visually similar to Gerralt being important to the story. And of course fans are upset at them messing with the symbolism in possibly the only adaptation American audiences are going to get, and a lot of them don't want to read the books.

Or you just get bad writing/implementation of ideas. Luke tossing away the light saber, rebooting the Ghostbusters with an all female cast, but forgetting to take the work seriously as a core to the characters. Rebooting She-Ra, but making both her and her boyfriend gay so that they can't have a romance. And on and on and on.

Dragon Age is a fantasy property, so it's going to have audience overlap with all of these other fantasy/geek fandoms. And the fans are just extremely touchy because their franchises keep being handled so poorly, it's ridiculous how these companies are planning to keep operating.

It's not DEI that's the problem. It's poor writing, poor production, etc. But the poor quality surrounds DEI topics, and so they're just hypersensitive to anything DEI and view it as bad.

And, quite honestly, Dragon Age seems set to burn us again, so I can't say they're entirely wrong, even if I think they're being blinded by the wrong thing. It's not the DEI, it's the bad production. It could be done well. This is not doing it well.

[Mysti_Fogg]

Originally posted by unseenclass:

Originally posted by MrQun:

I personally don't care if a game is inclusive just so long as it makes sense and that it doesn't negatively affect the story. But by simply ticking off check boxes for different races/ sex etc is just virtue signalling and it is quite patronising. In fact I know a few gay people (my brother included) and they all tell me that they are sick and tired of all of this "woke" BS.

This argument makes no sense whatsoever. Simply ticking off check boxes for different races/sex? So if you are making a character creator where is the line? Do you add an option so a character can look Asian? Is that to much? How about Indian or native american? Where is this line that I stopped adding options and am not just being condescending to minoritys? Also I know a gay person too and they like "woke" BS. So now who do we balive?

I've gone over the race thing elsewhere, but the quick answer is, after 4 games, they SHOULD be giving us a country/area where black people come from and one where Asian people come from.

When it was just Ferelden, we could just shrug and think they came from Navarra, since we didn't see that. And then we met someone from Navarra, and that didn't seem to work and there weren't really other countries mentioned.

Black people in DA could be from an Atlantis expy that sunk into the sea or a Wakanda expy where they have the highest level of tech available. But at this point we need an answer and/or an acknowledgement of some other continent that people can easily travel from.

Because it is weird to have these black and Asian people who have just poofed into existence from nowhere. It's weird.

Maybe DA:V has an answer. But I haven't been impressed by the world building in DA for DA:V, so I'm doubtful.

[DarkXessZ]

Originally posted by Mysti_Fogg:

There's a couple things at play. One is specific to Dragon Age and the other is specific to American society at the moment.

Dragon Age specific:

People are sensitive to "does this make sense in the world that has been built?" And I don't disagree with them that that is a concern. The characters in the world should sound part of that world, not our world.

So nonbinary inclusion is difficult, for example, not because nonbinary people wouldn't exist, but because they wouldn't use that vocabulary. Also high odds that they'd have some culture specific ideas of what that means and how they should identify themselves to others in the community. A writer can write something that would be inclusive, but it's maybe not going to hit in a way that nonbinary people would like because it doesn't have familiar vocabulary and may highlight issues that aren't facing that community today because the issues don't exist in the fantasy world for that kind of character. Meanwhile, if the writer were to write using modern vocabulary there's a good chance of pissing off fans or people who just want to be in a different world because why is a fantasy character using those words.

You can do it. You can write in all kinds of inclusivity. But it requires a lot of mental work thinking about how society (or multiple societies since there are different countries) will react to things.

American Society problem:

Fantasy and scifi franchises in particularly have been gathering bad reputations for burning fans through forcing diversity into properties. We need more black characters? Let's race swap someone. We need more gay characters? Let's swap around someone's sexuality. We need more female characters? we'll just swap genders.

If a property has an insane number of iterations, like, for example, Spider-man, you can get away with it a little bit. There's a whole Spider-verse full of alternate spider people. Having alternate spider people doesn't mean that Peter Parker is ruined, and can provide for some interesting alternate universe story telling of what could have happened or how people could have been.

But then you have something like The Witcher, which oddly enough HAS a good background for inclusivity because people just go dropped on their world willy nilly from another world during the conjunction of the spheres. But they wanted to make Ciri black originally, despite her being visually similar to Gerralt being important to the story. And of course fans are upset at them messing with the symbolism in possibly the only adaptation American audiences are going to get, and a lot of them don't want to read the books.

Or you just get bad writing/implementation of ideas. Luke tossing away the light saber, rebooting the Ghostbusters with an all female cast, but forgetting to take the work seriously as a core to the characters. Rebooting She-Ra, but making both her and her boyfriend gay so that they can't have a romance. And on and on and on.

Dragon Age is a fantasy property, so it's going to have audience overlap with all of these other fantasy/geek fandoms. And the fans are just extremely touchy because their franchises keep being handled so poorly, it's ridiculous how these companies are planning to keep operating.

It's not DEI that's the problem. It's poor writing, poor production, etc. But the poor quality surrounds DEI topics, and so they're just hypersensitive to anything DEI and view it as bad.

And, quite honestly, Dragon Age seems set to burn us again, so I can't say they're entirely wrong, even if I think they're being blinded by the wrong thing. It's not the DEI, it's the bad production. It could be done well. This is not doing it well.

Holy crap, you wrote everything what I have in mind and said, but just more detailed. Pretty much the whole situation of what's going on.

You are like a mind reader. Take my points.

[Ssenkrad_II]

I'm just waiting for some pedo, beasty, harem, etc. inclusion you bigots!

[Some Kinda Kobold]

When it comes to dragon age, I think it's Less about 'inclusion' and more that they've basically destroyed what the IP stands as.

originally, Dragon Age was all gritty, dark, gory, Brutal. Very un-colorful in a sense.

Now? it almost looks like a silly Dungeons and Dragons Campaign. Bright, colorful, witty. "Flirtatious". The very 'essence' of what the Dragon Age IP was, has been swept away.

Though for others. It's also just an annoyance that in place of decent Character customisation, choices have been 'Uglified' and toned down drastically to appeal to a far. FAR smaller audience.

[Enola Gay]

When it's well done, it's not an issue. Look at the movie paranorman, they made 1 of the main supporting characters gay.

Pandering is something that should be ridiculed and rejected. it doesn't help, it just makes things worse. The corporate suits don't actually care about this stuff, if they did they wouldn't act very differently in the countries where its illegal and punishable by death to support being gay. it's all virtue signalling to them to make extra cash by putting 1 group up on a pedestal. It always fails in gaming because instead of treating all their potential customers as equal, they end up making the focus on a small subsection of people.

Saudi Arabia (where being gay is either a prison sentence or you are executed) owns 24 million EA shares. Because EA didn't care how they treat gay people and willingly sold them shares. They sold them 8 million shares alone just last year.

If they truly cared about gay people, they would refuse to do business with people that execute them just for existing.

They don't care, and the people white knighting for them are ignorant of this.

[Some Kinda Kobold]

What about the exclusion of large body proportions?

What about all of them poor women with wide hips and full chests? They're being pretty excluded right now.

[🌸 s u n f l o w e r 🌸]

OP, it's because people are blessed to have so few real problems that they have to make up problems to feel they're contributing to something. Best to just ignore the silly gooses.