Do right wing/conservative (mainstream) video games even exist?

[Akboris]

Ive noticed that seemingly every video game to ever make it big and generate enough to create a whole franchise of games, and hell, even most one off games to see a full release, parrot left wing talking points and themes and agendas beneath the surface (with varying quality of writing of course), why does it seem like genuinely conservative video games, as in, created by or at least with the intent of supporting conservatives or right wing ideals, basically dont exist?

This is also funny given just how much pressure certain groups place on the industry to parrot specific ideals and agendas, given that the industry almost already support them.

[B]

Chunk Norris ☯님이 먼저 게시:

Sek-Raktaa님이 먼저 게시:

Because the only people that get upset over the restroom sign on a space ship featuring a unisex symbol are right wingers.

Because the only people to get upset that an RPG's character creator lets you choose your custom characters genitals and pronouns are right wingers.

Because the only people to get upset that a female protagonist isn't hyper sexualised and doesn't wear skimpy outfits all the time are right wingers.

Shall I continue or do you get the point?

Actually much of what you described is "woke vs everyone else" And "woke" is definitely a left wing ideology.

Consider JK Rowling, she's a far-left socialist who rejects much of gender theory and would get upset at all the things you listed despite not being a right-winger.

Woke just means being aware of social justice issues. It's not a prescription to one political ideology or another. For example the anti white replacement movement is all about making aware of a bunch of white people who feel like they're being replaced in society. A social justice issue in their minds thus woke. Super woke.

[Chunk Norris ☯]

B님이 먼저 게시:

Chunk Norris ☯님이 먼저 게시:

Actually much of what you described is "woke vs everyone else" And "woke" is definitely a left wing ideology.

Consider JK Rowling, she's a far-left socialist who rejects much of gender theory and would get upset at all the things you listed despite not being a right-winger.

Woke just means being aware of social justice issues. It's not a prescription to one political ideology or another. For example the anti white replacement movement is all about making aware of a bunch of white people who feel like they're being replaced in society. A social justice issue in their minds thus woke. Super woke.

No. Woke means pushing left-wing social issues that very often these left-wingers created themselves.

It's pretty much the exact opposite from being socially aware of issues.

Remember the word comes from slang used in the black community of Democrat voters in the 1960's who for the last 30 years were majority voting Democrat, and this is Jim Crow Democrats..."woke" were minority members in the Democratic Party that wanted their own party to be less racist.

[B]

Chunk Norris ☯님이 먼저 게시:

B님이 먼저 게시:

Woke just means being aware of social justice issues. It's not a prescription to one political ideology or another. For example the anti white replacement movement is all about making aware of a bunch of white people who feel like they're being replaced in society. A social justice issue in their minds thus woke. Super woke.

No. Woke means pushing left-wing social issues that very often these left-wingers created themselves.

It's pretty much the exact opposite from being socially aware of issues.

Remember the word comes from slang used in the black community of Democrat voters in the 1960's who for the last 30 years were majority voting Democrat, and this is Jim Crow Democrats..."woke" were minority members in the Democratic Party that wanted their own party to be less racist.

See right now you are pushing your own woke agenda that woke agendas are only liberal. You see woke agendas as a social justic issue and thus are propagating woke agenda against the woke agenda.

[76561199676322390]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Rather than enjoying the diversity of gaming

You a funny guy. This so called "diversity" is always exactly the same. LGBT, blacks, strong independent women. That's about it. Whoompty doo.

Not only that, but they are so scared of stereotypes that everything has been completely flattened and there isn't any essential difference between a man and a woman anymore. Except for outward appearance.

And of course it is all exactly the same in terms of political views. "Inclusivity" means censorship, it means you can't offend anyone in the whole world, so that limits the options for actual diversity a lot.

[Haruspex]

https://store.steampowered.com/app/675630/Super_POTUS_Trump/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2487350/Alex_Jones_NWO_Wars/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/346900/AdVenture_Capitalist/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/22310/Rogue_Warrior/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/203290/Americas_Army_Proving_Grounds/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1259420/Days_Gone/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1548850/Six_Days_in_Fallujah/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/379430/Kingdom_Come_Deliverance/
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1158310/Crusader_Kings_III/

[Boblin the Goblin]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Sek-Raktaa님이 먼저 게시:

Because the only people that get upset over the restroom sign on a space ship featuring a unisex symbol are right wingers.

Because the only people to get upset that an RPG's character creator lets you choose your custom characters genitals and pronouns are right wingers.

Because the only people to get upset that a female protagonist isn't hyper sexualised and doesn't wear skimpy outfits all the time are right wingers.

Shall I continue or do you get the point?

Yes indeed, this made up "culture war" is just one group of people getting upset that other groups of people get some representation. Rather than enjoying the diversity of gaming and being an enjoyable friendly environment for all, there are some people who want the whole industry to submit to one set of norms. That already goes against the fundamentals of art. But it's not like such facts matter to them.

Not gonna address your incorrect claim of only 1%-2% representation of ethnic minorities in video games?

[Dom]

kwekkie님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Rather than enjoying the diversity of gaming

You a funny guy. This so called "diversity" is always exactly the same. LGBT, blacks, strong independent women. That's about it. Whoompty doo.

Not only that, but they are so scared of stereotypes that everything has been completely flattened and there isn't any essential difference between a man and a woman anymore. Except for outward appearance.

And of course it is all exactly the same in terms of political views. "Inclusivity" means censorship, it means you can't offend anyone in the whole world, so that limits the options for actual diversity a lot.

Not sure why someone would argue that it is important to offend people with video games.

Either way, no one is blocking anyone from making offensive games. It's just that the creators of such games cannot publish their games on certain platforms and such platforms are perfectly within their rights to refuse business ties if they want to do that. So yeah.

It's 2024 and hatred isn't tolerated.

[Chunk Norris ☯]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

kwekkie님이 먼저 게시:

You a funny guy. This so called "diversity" is always exactly the same. LGBT, blacks, strong independent women. That's about it. Whoompty doo.

Not only that, but they are so scared of stereotypes that everything has been completely flattened and there isn't any essential difference between a man and a woman anymore. Except for outward appearance.

And of course it is all exactly the same in terms of political views. "Inclusivity" means censorship, it means you can't offend anyone in the whole world, so that limits the options for actual diversity a lot.

Not sure why someone would argue that it is important to offend people with video games.

Either way, no one is blocking anyone from making offensive games. It's just that the creators of such games cannot publish their games on certain platforms and such platforms are perfectly within their rights to refuse business ties if they want to do that. So yeah.

It's 2024 and hatred isn't tolerated.

Except..."woke" isn't actually against hatred. Look at how increasingly violent the woke have gotten over the years.

They use the guise of "being against hatred" to fool people into supporting their cause.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2192840/Terfenstein_3D/

[sleeps]

i'm being honest here, fighting for a good cause doesn't mean you are a saint

[76561199586159139]

sleeps님이 먼저 게시:

i'm being honest here, fighting for a good cause doesn't mean you are a saint

An understatement if I ever saw one. Hitler wanted to make a better world. A world of Aryans. That's how he thought a better world should look like.

[76561199586159139]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

kwekkie님이 먼저 게시:

You a funny guy. This so called "diversity" is always exactly the same. LGBT, blacks, strong independent women. That's about it. Whoompty doo.

Not only that, but they are so scared of stereotypes that everything has been completely flattened and there isn't any essential difference between a man and a woman anymore. Except for outward appearance.

And of course it is all exactly the same in terms of political views. "Inclusivity" means censorship, it means you can't offend anyone in the whole world, so that limits the options for actual diversity a lot.

Not sure why someone would argue that it is important to offend people with video games.

Either way, no one is blocking anyone from making offensive games. It's just that the creators of such games cannot publish their games on certain platforms and such platforms are perfectly within their rights to refuse business ties if they want to do that. So yeah.

It's 2024 and hatred isn't tolerated.

What an utterly naive and dodgy reponse. Did he say that games should offend people? No, he said that inclusivity limits the options for diversity.

[Dom]

Minikin Cayuse님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Not sure why someone would argue that it is important to offend people with video games.

Either way, no one is blocking anyone from making offensive games. It's just that the creators of such games cannot publish their games on certain platforms and such platforms are perfectly within their rights to refuse business ties if they want to do that. So yeah.

It's 2024 and hatred isn't tolerated.

What an utterly naive and dodgy reponse. Did he say that games should offend people? No, he said that inclusivity limits the options for diversity.

Said that it's a problem how games can't offend people. Last paragraph of the comment.

[76561199586159139]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Minikin Cayuse님이 먼저 게시:

What an utterly naive and dodgy reponse. Did he say that games should offend people? No, he said that inclusivity limits the options for diversity.

Said that it's a problem how games can't offend people. Last paragraph of the comment.

Dude. Seriously. Are you actually unable to parse this?

Inclusivity means: preventing potentially insulting anyone. That means it is going to be restrictive. That is what he said.

He did not say: Games SHOULD offend people. Wtf.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

kwekkie님이 먼저 게시:

You a funny guy. This so called "diversity" is always exactly the same. LGBT, blacks, strong independent women. That's about it. Whoompty doo.

Not only that, but they are so scared of stereotypes that everything has been completely flattened and there isn't any essential difference between a man and a woman anymore. Except for outward appearance.

And of course it is all exactly the same in terms of political views. "Inclusivity" means censorship, it means you can't offend anyone in the whole world, so that limits the options for actual diversity a lot.

Not sure why someone would argue that it is important to offend people with video games.

Either way, no one is blocking anyone from making offensive games. It's just that the creators of such games cannot publish their games on certain platforms and such platforms are perfectly within their rights to refuse business ties if they want to do that. So yeah.

It's 2024 and hatred isn't tolerated.

Hatred is still tolerated.

Just hatred towards the 'right' people.

"Offensive" video games is a very arbitrary label. Some people were offended by Six Days in Fallujah because they claimed it glorified horrible events. Some people are upset at Ready or Not because there are school shooter scenarios.

Having games that push the envelope on offense is a good thing. That's how games grow as a medium.

[Dom]

Minikin Cayuse님이 먼저 게시:

Dom님이 먼저 게시:

Said that it's a problem how games can't offend people. Last paragraph of the comment.

Dude. Seriously. Are you actually unable to parse this?

Inclusivity means: preventing potentially insulting anyone. That means it is going to be restrictive. That is what he said.

He did not say: Games SHOULD offend people. Wtf.

If the person doesn't think that games should offend people then why are they against restricting offensive games gaining popularity and attention? More people will be offended if such games will be distributed. If games shouldn't offend, should fight against occasions when they do just that.

Similarly, if I think that crime is a problem, it seems quite self-evident that I should support policies that reduce crime.

Otherwise it is easy to say that your position is contradictory.