It must be their policy at this point, don't rock the boat, don't piss anyone off, deny everything we make is in any way political.
I mean if u conveniently leave out the specific part about the drones and decide to ignore the fact that the US military has been using UAVs since the early 2000s in its War on Terror then yeah the above summary can def sound apolitical
Nope! He never had an airline pilot crash into a symbol of the United States and kill the President and most of Congress in his books...
Right and the Division, Division 2 and other Ubisoft games have nothing political about them. They don't open with a statement about how the game was made by people of various ideologies, gender identities or sexual preferences or anything. Which in and of itself is sadly a political statement in today's day and age.
Ah this ol chestnutHowever, I'm starting to realize that if what Steven Seagal movies are considered political, then maybe Trump being the US president isn't as bizzarre as I thought.
Reading that post was like reading an OBJECTIVE GAME REVIEW™I mean if u conveniently leave out the specific part about the drones and decide to ignore the fact that the US military has been using UAVs since the early 2000s in its War on Terror then yeah the above summary can def sound apolitical
Literally how do you not have the self awareness to realize that you shutting your brain off and thinking something's dumb and superficial does not=something is not full of political statements.Look, agree to disagree, ok? You've devolved into insults since a few messages now and I'm not going to follow you there. You set your standards, I set mine.
You think Bond is political and I shut my brain off. I think Bond is dumb and none of its clumsy and superficial attempts at "themes" is worthy of the dignity of the world "political", and I'll consume my media based on how it deserves to be consumed.
its almost like that poster is being willfully ignorant
What makes drones inherently more political than guns or tanks or nukes?
What will determine if this game as some sort of political value is how these things are portrayed and what messages it will carry, not their mere presence, no?
...seems like the most generic Steven Seagal movie plot to me, but ok.
It's not that we want them to say anything in particular. It's just that war/conflict is inherently political. It's just incredibly idiotic to make statements like "we don't want to make political statements" when your game handles topics like AI/drone usage in conflict, domestic terrorism, assassinating political figures etc.
At this point Tom Clancy is pure branding.
The games have had nothing to do with him or his themes for at least a decade.
Are there any real-world parallels to a special forces agent going rogue and creating their own government on a private island? Hell, this is more in parallel to Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker than it is to anything Clancy ever wrote about.
Because their games make political statement, like saying only the people with guns will survive is a political statement.I know people always get mad at Ubisoft when they say this, but... why do their games *need* to make political statements? The Division 2 was actually docked review points from several outlets because of this, and it's like... the game is a looter shooter. No one asks Destiny to take a stand on current issues. Does the kinda-modern day setting mean it has to choose a side? I don't get it.
Not that bothered. Not every piece of media needs to be a political statement. Like those Marvel flicks games can also just be dumb popcorn fun.
Nobody is saying they should make political statements, that they should be good, deep or whatever.I know people always get mad at Ubisoft when they say this, but... why do their games *need* to make political statements? The Division 2 was actually docked review points from several outlets because of this, and it's like... the game is a looter shooter. No one asks Destiny to take a stand on current issues. Does the kinda-modern day setting mean it has to choose a side? I don't get it.
Because their games make political statement, like saying only the people with guns will survive is a political statement.
The problem is that the games have political statements but then Ubisoft says "nah guys, this story dealing with real life political issues isn't political".
Ha! True words.
Or maybe it's just fleshing out it's own fictional world?
Again, people are only making these connections because the game takes place in DC and the guns look real. If that exact same statement was made in Destiny, no one would call it a "political statement".
Or it's because most people can notice insanely obvious political statements.
Uh, aliens and science fiction are a notorious hotbed of political storytelling. Its often a way to look at our society through a layer of abstraction, revealing its hypocrisies in starker detail or arguing for better ways we could all live together.Just as a short exercise:
Imagine all of the story beats in The Division 2 are exactly the same, but the game takes place on a fictional planet 1000 years in the future and the enemies are humanoid in appearance but also clearly alien. Imagine hearing the line "We only survived because we had guns".
Is this still a political statement?
Ubisoft games, for whatever reason, aren't allowed to exist within their own fictional universes. Everything they do has to be some sort of political message because the games take place in real-world locations and involve governments. I imagine the devs, who more than likely just want to make interesting scenarios for players, get real tired of hearing this stuff about their games.
Uh, aliens and science fiction are a notorious hotbed of political storytelling. Its often a way to look at our society through a layer of abstraction, revealing its hypocrisies in starker detail or arguing for better ways we could all live together.
And even putting aside the fact that ALL storytelling is political (especially any storytelling pointed to as being apolitical) the problem here is that most of the popular franchises ubisoft has explicitly deal with politics. Waging war against despots, government missions to kill terrorists, inspiring the people to rise up and help you assassinate their oppressors. Their assertions of apoliticism are absurd and made in bad faith.
Wildlands is literally about the War on Drugs.There is a difference between political themes/settings and political statements/messages. Of course Tom Clancy-branded games include political themes.
Ubisoft is saying that the games aren't meant to convey statements about real-world politics, which a lot of people here and in the media are having trouble separating from story themes. The games and universes are still fictional, and if the creator specifically says "we aren't taking any political stances with this creation", maybe people should listen to them instead of saying "nuh-uh, lol".
Its a Tom Clancy game, it's gonna have certian themes. I don't even know why they're saying anything. Nobody is gonna get upset that a Tom Clancy game feels like a Tom Clancy game. They just look dumb by saying it's not supposed to be political
By setting the game on an actual, sovereign country being effectively invaded by an United States murder squad, they're pretty much taking a stance.This is what I'm talking about. People are unable to separate the setting/theme from messages. As if the game is automatically making a statement about the real world in some way because it loosely mirrors things that happen in the real world. It's not allowed to just be a video game about 4 spec ops guys shooting dudes in a jungle.
Imagine all of the story beats in The Division 2 are exactly the same, but the game takes place on a fictional planet 1000 years in the future and the enemies are humanoid in appearance but also clearly alien. Imagine hearing the line "We only survived because we had guns".
Is this still a political statement?
Do you know what the plot of Ghost Recon Wildlands is?This is what I'm talking about. People are unable to separate the setting/theme from messages.
.............Are you being sarcastic?
A game existing is a political statement simply because 20 years ago they chose to associate with the name?
So if this game was called Ghost Recon: Breakpoint without the Tom Clancy monniker, it wouldn't be political?
Not that bothered. Not every piece of media needs to be a political statement. Like those Marvel flicks games can also just be dumb popcorn fun.
I'm surprised so many people go for the bait and don't understand their statement, lmao
That has political messages in it including a direct commentary on whether or not it'd be a good idea to eliminate a warlord who committed atrocities vs not executing him and torturing him for information before he gets out and the cycle starts again. It includes things like political pardons for the sake of gaining useful intel. It's absolutely a politically charged game top to bottom. Just because the game is also fun doesn't mean it isn't rife with political messages. Their creatives aren't braindead, I'm sure they wouldn't be even able to create an apolitical game tackling this subject matter if they tried and even if marketing says otherwise.
Get outta here with this sensible and level headed reply shit.Not that bothered. Not every piece of media needs to be a political statement. Like those Marvel flicks games can also just be dumb popcorn fun.
Godzilla for some might be just a giant lizard, but that doesnt deny the fact that he is an allegory for nuclear weapons.Sure do. Completed it 100%. But it's just that - a plot. A story that drives gameplay. It literally does not need to be anything more than that.
That has political messages in it including a direct commentary on whether or not it'd be a good idea to eliminate a warlord who committed atrocities vs not executing him and torturing him for information before he gets out and the cycle starts again. It includes things like political pardons for the sake of gaining useful intel. It's absolutely a politically charged game top to bottom. Just because the game is also fun doesn't mean it isn't rife with political messages. Their creatives aren't braindead, I'm sure they wouldn't be even able to create an apolitical game tackling this subject matter if they tried and even if marketing says otherwise.
Lemme translate this into gamer speak:
Devs arguing that their game about drone warfare isn't political is about as genuine as them arguing that 30fps actually makes a game more cinematic.