It's a game. It would probably have made the person more emotionally invested in the game or something.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Vice's 'Tell Me Why' Review Is Problematic And Misses The Mark
- Thread starter SweetNicole
- Start date
- Status
It's a game. It would probably have made the person more emotionally invested in the game or something.
Perhaps I'm misreading it, but it seems the author is completely fine with safe games but is instead upset that this "safe" game brings up trauma. Thus to them its essentially trying to have it both ways.
I'm a cis-man but I found the portrayal to be refreshing because Tyler was a character who happens to be trans but isn't defined by that fact.
I kind of assume he's gone through transphobia throughout his life, But this story wasn't about dealing with transphobia, it's about what happened to their family.
I kind of assume he's gone through transphobia throughout his life, But this story wasn't about dealing with transphobia, it's about what happened to their family.
Im also trans and in the same boat. Was surprised to find this thread title proclaiming it "problematic"
To me her position isnt "trans games need to be about the #struggle" its that (based on her review, havent played the game) they wrote a #struggle story with the #struggle surgically removed & that in particular is what feels weird. I dont think I would agree that it feels weird if i played the game, but I dont think its an invalid take. When Dia says she wants "harvest moon, but trans" i dont think she means "Harvest moon, but everyone is extremely transphobic to your character all the time" or even "Harvest Moon, but sometimes the waitress at the diner slips up and misgenders your character".
I follow Dia on twitter (and ill admit - on some days i wonder why) which means i wound up reading a tweet in a conversation about her review where she says she doesnt have a definitive answer on how studios/creators should handle rep. She also retweeted Riley MacLeod's (a trans male writer) glowing review who absolutely loved how the representation was handled. And I dont mean "Quote retweeted with her trademark acerbic snark", I mean she just retweeted it. I just dont think she would share the complete opposite viewpoint without commentary if she didnt think it was valid or not worth considering. Its weird i have to pull up extra receipts for a review that goes out of its way to cushion that a lot of people will have a different experience and thats valid, but here we are.
It's acceptable to Vice because her style of woke antagonism fits right in with their blue sky view of how leftism is supposed to work.
But is it fair to harshly judge a game's depiction of a transgender character's past experiences, when this is only the 1st of 3 chapters that are planned for this game?
i got the impression the reviews are for the full thing -- i think each chapter is releasing roughly a week apart. unless google lied to me.
Ahh, okay. I'm not reading any reviews I'm just going to jump in and see for myself.
I'm sympathetic to the line that Dia is trying to walk here. It does seem like she's making a point that since the game is trying to represent the experience of trans people (and indigenous people and people of yet other cultures), that she finds it lacking that the game does not represent her experience - nor the experience of many other trans and indigenous people. I think that is a fair perspective to have.
At the same time, I personally don't think any of what you quoted and included necessarily contradicts or in any way challenges the viewpoint Sweet Nicole shared in the OP. The problem with expecting that a depiction of an identity conform with your expectations of what defines a proper depiction of that identity is that other people have different but equally valid expectations of what that identity should include.
It does seem like setting this story in small town Alaska with people who mostly want things to work out is certainly not the experience that the vast majority of people who are going to play this game will be able to identify with. And maybe it's a shame that a nuanced and respectful depiction of one trans man's experience is of an experience that is foreign to most people with that identity. And yet, I personally (who knows nothing and am out of my depth) don't really see any of that as a negative for this game. Unless the experience is foreign or disrespectful to members of the community, I perhaps see it more usefully framed as a call for more media that explores the full tapestry of experiences - of which this is one valid thread.
I can absolutely empathize with the OP's feeling that the review subtly and maybe subconsciously (or.. not so much) suggests that depictions of transness and native cultures that don't feature identity-specific conflict are somehow lesser. That's absolutely a mentality that I brought earlier this year into Cyberpunk threads, and I was rightly called out for it. Depictions of trans people in media are not necessarily better or more real (and certainly not more respectful) simply because they confront and depict the traumas and aggressions that trans people can face - especially when it's deployed as set dressing for amusement.
Mm.. course I just word vomited a bunch, and I'm sure I got quite a bit wrong. Correct me if necessary. I sometimes think too much and entirely miss the point.
These stories are great to read.
I'm non-binary and was terrified of going to college after my experiences at school, just to realize that no one gave a shit. One of the best feelings.
Again, I don't follow. Are you saying "opinions" can't be problematic? If someone is e.g. straight out racist or homophobic in a review (and with the alt right's foothold in gaming, there's entire sites devoted to that), how is that not problematic?
I'm not categorically saying this specific review is problematic or not (I'm a cis man so anything I say about it comes with a pinch of salt, although the OP sure makes a pretty damn good case). What I find preposterous is the notion that reviews, in general, can't be problematic.
Edit:
So now we're also dismissing transgender discussion with "it's just a game", too?
Last edited:
Is this necessary? Reducing a journalists opinion piece down to their publication for the sake of trashing the publication?
Especially given that the journalist is trans and we also have conflicting opinions on the article in this thread. This isn't a universally dismissable "hot take".
I swear gamers love to say something negative about video game publications every chance they get on this forum.
The notion that racism is problematic is pretty weird. Racism isn't problematic, it's just bad. Call a spoon a spoon.
Yea her vendetta against the last of us and Neil was embarrassing.
I've been reading the (almost) opposite takes by the reviewers Dia retweeted on their timeline; I feel like it contextualizes the "defanged" approach they mentioned in their review a bit more.
Spoilers For Episode One
I think I understand the line they're trying to walk in their review now, saying that it comes off as odd the main character's trauma as a trans man is brought up often but it's always framed in a "I mean well" sort of way.
I haven't played the first episode yet so those impressions could be different for people in thread who have.
Spoilers For Episode One
I think I understand the line they're trying to walk in their review now, saying that it comes off as odd the main character's trauma as a trans man is brought up often but it's always framed in a "I mean well" sort of way.
I haven't played the first episode yet so those impressions could be different for people in thread who have.
Last edited:
So we're now acting like "problematic" isn't overwhelmingly used precisely to call out casual bigotry? In any case, my point is that of course reviews can be "problematic".
It is, I'm saying it's stupid and overly euphemistic. We should say what we mean.
I'll probably skip reviews for this till I've played it, but I found myself similarly taken aback by the TLOU2 review, so I know Vice is far from perfect.
Don't think Twenties is anywhere but BET and Showtime right now.
Don't think Twenties is anywhere but BET and Showtime right now.
I pretty much disagree with everything you just said.
First off: What exactly is a universally dismissible hot take? What makes one hot take universally dismissible and another hot take not?
Second: I'm not reducing anything, or dismissing anyone's opinion because of where they work. I'm saying that
"journalist's" opinion is bad on its own. And it happens to be part of a trend of bad opinions from that site, and more than that, the bad opinions all share a common theme. I think the views expressed in this review are dismissive, which is ironic given how the publication they work for prides themselves on being inclusive. Ironically, from what I've seen from that publication over the last several months in particular, the people who work there, who are so proud of being progressive and inclusive, actually tend to be incredibly strict about what constitutes progressive and inclusive, and if your artistic work doesn't meet their standards of progressive or inclusive, then you're artistic work isn't good enough.
Lastly: The irony of you accusing me of reducing the opinion of someone else and just lumping them into a group, and then you concluding your post by reducing my opinion and lumping me into the "gamers" group.
User Banned (1 Month): Concern trolling around discussion of representation
Era has been transformed into a very political gaming forum, which is sad to see. TLOU 2 OT just went off rails on identity politics.
The bolded part above... I don't even know where to start with this. So I won't. Otherwise I'll be banned in an instant.
What is sad about seeing people communicate their lived perspectives? What rails should they be sticking to? How do we not talk about games without considering the people who play them, the people that make them, the people that are portrayed, and being aware of who these people are and what perspectives they bring with them?
We have been asking for more diverse representation in games. We get it and now complain that each story needs to be centered around the potential difficulties of the fictional represented character? Demanding that diversity happens and then demanding that stories have to reflect commentary on the diversity doesn't seem like progress to me. Why can't we have marginalized characters where the focus is on how much they kick ass instead of "here's a marginalized character and all the bad things people can say/do to a person with that identity"? I have zero doubt that the former will continue to be a piece of future stories (which is great of course to point out.) I just don't like demanding stories be written in a certain way.
This seems to be the exact opposite of what people complained about with Tlou2.
This seems to be the exact opposite of what people complained about with Tlou2.
I don't think we should be so quick to label challenging or divergent opinions by trans people problematic. There are multitudes of trans experiences and responses to representation and to narrow it all down to a singular trans perspective against which everything else is problematic isn't going to help anyone.
To me it's sound like her argument is, that the game tries to engage with the difficulties of Trans people, but also not. It wants to say something, but the devs are afraid to say the wrong things, so it ends up in this weird middle ground. Maybe should have just made a game where the protagonist is trans, but it's not that important to the story.
I and probably most people here haven't played the game and are not trans, so it's difficult to judge any of this.
What makes you want to continue spending time on a forum where you feel you'd get banned for sharing your honest opinions? If you just want to talk about games "without politics" there are a myriad of other places you can do that.
Nope. It's always been this way. What has happened is that the no politics shills have dwindled in numbers and it's more visible now.
Basically "don't talk about the politics the devs themselves injected in the game so people can talk about them."
Also do you really believe Gamergate had nothing to do with the rise of the alt-right?
I haven't played the game, so I can only go by her review. As I stated above, I think her argument is, that the devs want to talk about trauma, but are afraid to say the wrong things and end up with a story that is in a weird middle ground between talking about trans issues and just being a story with a trans protagonist.
I thought one of the criticisms about the game is how the twist of the first episode is that
the mother was actually supportive of the brother's transition and was trying to kill him for some reason unrelated to transphobia?
I think Dia's review plainly speaks for itself, but I think the tension being wrestled with is pretty clear: in the search for better representation and creators not wanting to always indulge in trauma, aka the kind of stories we usually see about marginalized parts of society, do we risk reducing the truth of their identities? I think that's a pretty valid question.
Ultimately, it'd carry less weight if Tell Me Why itself had to carry less weight by being one of the few big-budget games dealing with such themes.
Ultimately, it'd carry less weight if Tell Me Why itself had to carry less weight by being one of the few big-budget games dealing with such themes.
Era has been a very political forum since day one. If you aren't interested in "identity politics", you can avoid political commentary, but please consider whether entering a thread by a transgender person criticising another transgender person's opinion of a transgender character's depiction, just to tell them that "reviews can't be problematic", is the best way to go about it.
Are you honestly saying the alt right hasn't been using videogame communities as spread vectors to a great effect? After freaking Gamergate?
Out of curiosity, what would your take be if in fact being true to the lived experiences of the trans community has a side-effect of continuing unhealthy attitudes towards trans people in the general? That has been my fear, as a cis person, when it comes to how trans people are referred to and their identities used (or misused) in media: by dead-naming characters, or utilizing transphobia to get across the point that transphobia happens and is realistic just persisting shitty attitudes towards trans people? I mean, I can agree that the realistic thing to do is let transphobia and racism, etc., be a part of games because that's just the way it is and truer to life, but the fact is, these are videogames, right? And isn't that the Cyberpunk / CDPR defense line on this?
The 'question' suggests that the cake can't be had and eaten to. But I am pretty sympathetic to the reasoning about videogames that says: our entertainment helps to shape our lives. If we persist in transphobia because it's real in our entertainment, does that mean we signal boosted something awful?
I'm not trans but I am queer and non-binary and to me the answer is to include more trans characters and narratives in video games that diversify the experiences portrayed through the screen and include trans people in the writing room and acting stage. Right now if you want transmasculine representation in games you pretty much have two choices, Lev or Tyler, and that's it. Two portrayals that are on fairly extreme (apparently I have not played Tell Me Why) opposite ends of the spectrum. So if you have issues with the portrayals or don't feel represented by them, it's pretty much all that there is. If there's more representation and trans voices, there's no need for one game to try to be "the game" for trans representation that needs to represent everyone in the correct way (because there is no correct way that applies to everyone).
Complaining about things being overly political sure is a take from someone who's username is "Bioshocker".
.
I am not equipped to answer that question, and do not have the lived experience to even try.
But I'd say this thread even coming to light, the tension the OP is highlighting—I think that's what Dia was trying to engage with. The reaction is understandable.
I understand what you're saying, but as a single studio, making a single game... what is DONTNOD supposed to do as a studio?
Tell a traumatic trans tale?
Tell a "filed down, trauma-less" trans tale?
Put one foot in both pools and tell that tale?
Not tell any tale at all because no one else will do it?
Just seems unfair to unload on DONTNOD in this situation. It seems like an industry problem and DONTNOD is trying to help with that.
Maybe I'm 1000% wrong here, but it just feels so confusing to me reading this thread.
Well, it's just the author's opinion on the narrative. I don't see how it's problematic in any way. Maybe they just wanted something more meaty and less safe. And that's not what they got. Oh well, the game clearly wasn't their cup of tea in that department and they expressed their frustration with that. Is it problematic to have an opinion on character representation now? Where is this monolith I can look to?
I think that's kinda my point like... there isn't anything DONTNOD can do as a singular entity. And I think the reviewer also acknowledges this too and isn't out to obliterate DONTNOD because of how they approached Tyler and the narrative. Perhaps they could include more trans people in their writing room but even then those trans writers couldn't represent everyone. Trans people were involved with both Lev and Tyler and there's still criticism (but also praise at the same time) because what people are looking for and want in games about trans stories are vast and varied but the narratives in limited supply.
What are identity politics?
Where did the OT go off the rails?
Why is it sad that this is a "political" forum?
The main character is a lesbian and there's a transgender character in it.
Is discussing that very political? Should people have only discussed the gameplay?
You're called Bioshocker. What did you think about the part where Infinite comments that the slaves are just as bad as the slavers? I presume not political as it's a white man saying it.
You're afraid about being banned because you deny the alt right has a foothold in gaming?
Steve Bannon was involved in stoking the flames of Gamergate.
There's tons of racist and sexist YouTubers and most online games have unwelcoming communities.
Frankly it seems like the discussions on this forum make you uncomfortable. Why can't someone call a review problematic?
It's their opinion. Have a discussion.
Don't just go "This forum is too political, and if I told you whst I really feel about the alt-right I'd be banned"
When it comes to story with Trans characters, it not going to be easy when representing them when it comes to their transition, history with their friends and family, and who other people handle their identity. It the right thing to do when avoid the bumps that can position a trans character in a harmful way but, like real life, being very clean about ones life isn't very good when question how it possible that anyone can live a life without conflict. On the other end, don't be so aggressive to the point where they character can't have a place in life. It the problem I have with the TLOU2 when Lev is such a side character where their only being carried by the main cast.
By itself, Tell me why probably ok for being safe with it Trans character. Overall, we need more games with Trans characters.
By itself, Tell me why probably ok for being safe with it Trans character. Overall, we need more games with Trans characters.
- Status