A minority as one of the main characters, Yay or Nay?

[Matseb2611]

Elves, dwarves, catpeople, "aliens", robots and demons might be called races but they're actually different species.  I'm not trying to be pedantic here - they are different lifeforms in largely the same way that people, dogs, and insects are different lifeforms.  And that can be a really interesting theme on its own in a game, or a good allegory for "fantasy racism", but I feel it's a very different thing from including people of different looks and ethnicities in your game.

I'll have to respectfully disagree. They might be different species in biological terms (i.e. in most settings they can't mate with humans), but that's not the role they fill out in the story. The role they fill out is that of a race. They have sentience and can speak and think. In essence they are represented with an intellect equivalent to that of a human, except they have an entirely different culture, beliefs, and physical look.

 

[Wavelength]

I'll have to respectfully disagree. They might be different species in biological terms (i.e. in most settings they can't mate with humans), but that's not the role they fill out in the story. The role they fill out is that of a race. They have sentience and can speak and think. In essence they are represented with an intellect equivalent to that of a human, except they have an entirely different culture, beliefs, and physical look.

I'm not sure I agree (I feel like a really well-done "other species" should be inalienably different in their ways of thinking than humans are, even if intelligence is equal per se), but you do make a pretty interesting argument.  I guess in a lot of stories they do fill the function of race.

So I guess a better question for me to ask might be - why do we use this form of "race" so often in videogames, rather than the kind that we have around us in our world?

 

[Chaos Avian]

As mentioned in my earlier post, it's more so staying away from things that may seem controversial or something that would label them in a "negative" light. We don't relate to the plight of discrimination that elves for example may experience because they're not human.

Using species rather than race allows us to play around/ toy/ experiment with the idea while still being "safe. No one will call you out for oppressing a dwarf or bashing a fictional religion. But bring up the slave trade, holocaust or wrong doings in a Catholic Church and everyone loses their mind. Like in Persona 2 they had to censor the Adolf Hitler boss fight in the US and EU release.

 

[Dragnfly]

Just for the record, my avatar/sig was almost Strength from Black Rock Shooter (dark skin and white hair yeow!) but I noticed the visible cameltoe and decided it'd make a bad first impression.

I once read an article which tackled the race/species thing in tabletop roleplaying, using dictionary and colloquial reasons. It was really interesting. Google it. I think it was called Dwarf as a Species or something like that.

Anyway, as Chaos Avian said, I think a big reason the controversial topics are usually avoided in games or just skirted is because developers don't want to deal with the aftermath. Which I fully understand, it's annoying as hell. You also have to do it "right". You can't go all G Gundam with it. Though I do think racial stereotypes have a place in a story. I mean, they came from somewhere. A Canadian hockey playing lumberjack? Damn straight we've got those. An football-loving American with 60 guns in his basement? They've got those. A South Korean who's a math wiz with amazing Starcraft skills? Yep. It's just that we're not ALL those, and our odds of being those are determined by where we came from rather than what colour we are.

 

[Matseb2611]

So I guess a better question for me to ask might be - why do we use this form of "race" so often in videogames, rather than the kind that we have around us in our world?

To add to what Chaos Avian said, I think it's also because that's the purpose of the fantasy genre - to display a symbolism. You come up with entirely fictional examples of something to get your message across. You create a whole new scenario but with ties to the real world. An art doesn't have to speak its message in direct and literal terms after all. By creating a fictional race, you're only limited by your imagination and can come up with a lot of interesting plots and character interactions. That's my take on it anyway.

 

[captainproton]

Honestly, a bit of both is best, I think, with a leaning towards A.

B should be there, when you're working with a diverse cast, but more as an awareness that there is a difference in the cultural experience of different groups, rather than as a set of rules or even vague guidelines dictating a character's behavior. A person from a different background is will have been exposed to different cultural norms, which will have an effect on behavior, even if it's something as minor as having another holiday on the calendar.

It's a good thing to show that people of all varieties can be good and wise and brave and beautiful and stupid and cruel and horrible and weak. If, however, you're diversifying your cast for the sake of diversity, and not because That's Who The Character Is, then it's simply tokenism, and it *could* be more dangerous than homogenizing your group. I've seen too many games/movies/books/comics/etc do this to look Progressive, but the character ends up as a cheap collection of stereotypes and tropes rather than a person.

 

[hian]

I can't really answer this question by using your poll.

The real way to determine whether or not a minority should be in your game is something you should do by asking yourself why?/why not in relation to the world and the narrative you're crafting, not because of some non-sense idea about either conformity to some political ideal, or because you want your game to sell better.

Doing either of those latter things will cheapen your entire game.

When big publishing companies create an environment where minority characters are opted out of because they won't back games that have them in fear of the games not selling in predominately white countries like the states or the U.K - that's an issue in my opinion.

That being said, so is the opposite - when people start adding people of color simply because if you don't, you'll get socially ostracized and labeled a biggot by the the cultural elite.

If you're creating a game set in modern day U.S, I'd expect a certain amount of diversity - if you're creating a English Medieval action game, I wouldn't expect nearly as much, and there should be room for both kinds of games, and they should both be judged on their own merits, not on some imaginary metric of the perfect balance of ethnicities.

So, with that being said, if I have a minority in my game, it's because A) I just want to, for personal reasons, B.) it's a conscious design choice, and I thought that looked the best or C.) because it's relevant to the plot.

Stil though, white people tend to write primarily white characters, and if you live in a predominately caucasian country, you're going to get predominately "white" narratives.

This trend isn't unique to predominately caucasian countries though, as if you go to African countries most books will be about Africans, and if you go to Japan or China, most stories will be about Japanese and Chinese people respectively.

I think the reason for this is kinda obvious - it's partly about sub-conscious projection, people writng about what they know/unconsciously think of as the norm, and of course people writing what they can identify with viscerally speaking.

Although, it's obviously true that most of us can identify with the stories and personalities of people across cultures and ethnicies, I think people also generally prefer characters being "close to themselves" so to speak - a sentiment which I think is pretty strongly reflected when people ask for minority representation in games to begin with -

if having characters being close to you in some way on a visceral level wasn't important at all, then why would anyone ask for certain skin-colors at all?

Still though, it always struck me as odd when people complain about lack of representation in media, when they're talking about a group of people that after all, "lack representation" in the over-all population at large as well (which should be obvious by the use of the very term "minority" to begin with, I would think).

That being said though, as a white person, I still don't really write nor design white characters - but perhaps I'm kinda the odd one out in that regards.

I grew up consuming mostly non-western media, socializing with mostly minority friends, so I've never felt in touch with my "native" culture in that sense.

In either case, personally, I find "mixed ethnicities" to be much more visually appealing when I do general design, so most characters I design will be various hues of copper/beige or whatever, neither apparently black nor white (or anything else for that matter). Usually, there is no narrative reason for this.

It's also worth mentioning that a minority in the context of gaming does not necessarily mean what it does in conventional speech -

Because if you're game isn't set in the real world, in a specific country, then you can't assume the same minority labels apply.

For instance, to call Barret a minority, and write him like a minority (I,E experiencing racism etc) makes little to no sense when the game isn't set on earth to begin with, and if you're going to write the world of Gaia(FF7) like an analogy for earth this is going to require much more work and research than it otherwise would.

I don't expect a Japanese writer to be able to write a U.S-centric character of color, and I think that if he or she even tried to do so, most of the time, it would seem to be in poor taste for people who've lived, or been raised in the U.S.

 

[Foron]

I won't even read most of your post, but yay. So many people, ESPECIALLY minorities want to see themselves represented in a game!

Not really. In fact, some don't really care (as long as it's not intentionally offensive).

I say...eh. Do what suits your game best.

In fact, in my eyes, adding a minority character just to add one (as in you consciously chose that race, and you can change in anyway and it would make no difference) is close to not choosing a character because of their race (obviously the intent is different), because if you change someone's race, it likely won't affect how they act unless you use stereotypes (negative ones, like eating chicken all the time), and by that point, you ARE being racist

Going on a tangent, so hopefully it won't too long.

I'm not really picky about minorities (I'll include female characters in here as well, because they're almost linked when it comes to this type of thing) in games, as long as they aren't designed in a certain way because of their race/gender (no matter what gender, male of female), and it's actually pretty bad (I don't mind that the black best friend is well...black while being the comic relief).

IMHO, If you create a character as a minority/certain gender, it won't matter to me unless it's intentionally racist/sexist.

 

[Hollow]

I feel like a lot of this conversation is still being based upon the idea that the "default" is a light-skinned heterosexual male character. Anything different suddenly requires you to have a reason or makes it seem like you're trying to make a statement--which is really stupid, imo. I mean, what's wrong with having dark-skinned character just 'cause? Or a gay character? Or a character that's transgender? People like this exist in real life, so why must one make an excuse for them to exist in a game--or any other type of media?

Not really. In fact, some don't really care (as long as it's not intentionally offensive).

And just an aside, some underrepresented folks may not care, but a lot of them do. Using myself as an example: I, as a bisexual woman, will naturally gravitate and/or seek out forms of media that contain bisexual woman because I like to see characters that are like me. It may not seem like a huge deal, but there's a really nice feeling I get when I see a character like myself that is portrayed in a positive/interesting light.

 

[captainproton]

I agree with both your points, Hollow. But I do think that the reason that the light hetero male is the "default" hero is because the industry is mostly run by light hetero males, and most of the devs are light hetero males, and people tend to tell the stories from perspective which are the most familiar. And, as you said, people gravitate to characters with whom they can readily identify, so the market is made of mostly light hetero males, and the whole thing just feeds on itself, over and over again.

Also, most RPGs--of the sort most of us make--are made in Japan, which isn't nearly so diverse as countries like America or England or Canada, etc. And if you look at the anime aesthetic, Asian characters and European characters are pretty much indistinguishable, and characters of other ethnic origins are usually crude parodies, if they appear at all.

Being independent of a company, however, we here have the option of ignoring market demographics and telling the stories we want to tell. Which is pretty awesome.

 

[Hollow]

I can't find any proper statistics at the moment, but I don't think it's necessarily the dev's ethnicities/gender identities/religion/etc. that's the problem. I know when I was working on a Game Development degree last year, all of my classes were incredibly diverse and open-minded (which is saying something, since I live in the southern US). And most of the developer conferences I went to, despite being overwhelmingly male, were still very diverse. But again, I don't have any hard statistics. 

I believe the problem is more that the vast majority of media out there (not just games) features that "default" white man as a main character. So, like you said, people just end up doing what they've seen others do their entire lives. I think it's very important that, when creating characters, we developers really observe whether or not most of our characters fit into that default. If you honestly feel that changing a character's race/gender/etc. wouldn't affect your game that much or at all, then why not?

Also: heck yeah it's nice to be independent. How else would I get to have a main cast of almost 20 characters with only one dude in the bunch? 

 

[Foron]

I agree with both your points, Hollow. But I do think that the reason that the light hetero male is the "default" hero is because the industry is mostly run by light hetero males, and most of the devs are light hetero males, and people tend to tell the stories from perspective which are the most familiar. And, as you said, people gravitate to characters with whom they can readily identify, so the market is made of mostly light hetero males, and the whole thing just feeds on itself, over and over again.

Also, most RPGs--of the sort most of us make--are made in Japan, which isn't nearly so diverse as countries like America or England or Canada, etc. And if you look at the anime aesthetic, Asian characters and European characters are pretty much indistinguishable, and characters of other ethnic origins are usually crude parodies, if they appear at all.

Being independent of a company, however, we here have the option of ignoring market demographics and telling the stories we want to tell. Which is pretty awesome.

Actually, the only way the Japanese know about african americans for example, is through the media.

You see how that goes.

 

[Chaos Avian]

I know when I was working on a Game Development degree last year, all of my classes were incredibly diverse and open-minded (which is saying something, since I live in the southern US). 

Most classes like that tend to be like that, but as it stands NOW in the gaming industry most of them are run by light European heterosexual males. Usually when sexuality does come into it unfortunately they're always in a negative light. I've NEVER seen a transexual character in games portrayed positively, like wise if the game is a 15 or 18 age rating and they're a black person as a lead, partner or prominent figure it's always the loud, brash, profanity spitting stereotype...

I do think when the gaming industry has a massive turnover (i.e. when students become actual lead AAA developers or remain Indie but prominent), we'll definitely see a positive movement. 

 

[Chaos Avian]

I know when I was working on a Game Development degree last year, all of my classes were incredibly diverse and open-minded (which is saying something, since I live in the southern US). 

Most classes like that tend to be like that, but as it stands NOW in the gaming industry most of them are run by light European heterosexual males. Usually when sexuality does come into it unfortunately they're always in a negative light. I've NEVER seen a transexual character in games portrayed positively, like wise if the game is a 15 or 18 age rating and they're a black person as a lead, partner or prominent figure it's always the loud, brash, profanity spitting stereotype...

I do think when the gaming industry has a massive turnover (i.e. when students become actual lead AAA developers or remain Indie but pr), we'll definitely see a positive movement. 

Actually, the only way the Japanese know about african americans for example, is through the media.

You see how that goes.

 

From American media no less -_- Also, I don't really understand why people refer to black people as "African Americans". I can assure you that that term is quite incorrect, especially since you have the Caribbean Islands in between North and South America. I for one am half Jamaican, half Indian so when I hear "African American" is just boggles my mind sometimes.

 

[Foron]

I do think when the gaming industry has a massive turnover (i.e. when students become actual lead AAA developers or remain Indie but pr), we'll definitely see a positive movement.

As someone else said, most devs will use what they see, i.e. the same things.

 

From American media no less -_- Uh, no. In general. you almost sound like America is the only one doing this.

 

[Wavelength]

Females are fairly well (if still not equally) represented in video games as lead characters (especially compared to other media such as cinema) and in most video games a character's sexuality is never touched on so I think it's prejudiced to assume that most characters are hetero.

So I think the more important focus is race, and there's an interesting question that we've kind of danced around and touched on a bit here: is it better to have some characters of different races for no specific reason whatsoever (that is, a character who beyond their informed attributes or physical appearance would be impossible to guess their race), or is it better to save the minority characters for times when their minority status matters in some way?  OR is it better to eschew them both and go the route of most anime/Aqua Teen Hunger Force/early seasons of the Simpsons - where characters are given physical attributes that don't really match up with any real-world race?

I lean toward that last option, but I'm not so sure there's any perfect answer.

 

[Dragnfly]

I remember the huge lame arguments friends of mine would have over if character X was lesbian or character Y was gay when the official material had absolutely zero way to make any judgment. So I agree, it's usually not a factor in the story.

I think the 1st option you gave is perfectly doable. If the setting allows it it may add realism or it may just add deeper character design.

I think the 2nd option requires a rule of "only do it if you're going to do it right".

I use the 3rd option all the time but my settings are rarely ever in the real world or even on Earth. "What nationality is she?" "Depends. What nationality has natural blue hair?"

 

[Hollow]

...in most video games a character's sexuality is never touched on so I think it's prejudiced to assume that most characters are hetero.

This is the assumption of that vast majority of people: a character (or, you know, real-life person) is straight and cisgender until explicitly stated otherwise. This is the whole reason why "coming out" is a thing. Hell, even outright stating a character's LGBTQ+ status isn't enough sometimes. For example, there've been several cartoons recently to have lesbian couples (Avatar: Legend of Korra and Steven Universe are two). These couples have been explicitly shown on the show and explicitly confirmed by the creators themselves, and yet there's still people who will argue that they're straight and are just """good friends""".
So, no, a characters orientation and/or gender identity is not always important to the story, but it is still characterization. I don't need to know that a character likes gardening, but it helps to flesh them out as a character and makes me relate to them more. I don't need to know that a character is queer, but it helps to flesh them out as a character and makes me relate to them more.


Seriously, this idea that some representation is more important than others is counter-intuitive.

OR is it better to eschew them both and go the route of most anime/Aqua Teen Hunger Force/early seasons of the Simpsons - where characters are given physical attributes that don't really match up with any real-world race?

I feel like this approach skirts the issue though. Fantasy is fantasy, so you can have whatever fantastical race you want to have, but is giving some of them darker skin so implausible? Why is naturally blue hair more believable than a dark-skinned person?

 

[Dragnfly]

Naturally blue hair isn't more believable though. It's more fantastical. That's why I chose it.

 

[Wavelength]

This is the assumption of that vast majority of people: a character (or, you know, real-life person) is straight and cisgender until explicitly stated otherwise. This is the whole reason why "coming out" is a thing. Hell, even outright stating a character's LGBTQ+ status isn't enough sometimes. For example, there've been several cartoons recently to have lesbian couples (Avatar: Legend of Korra and Steven Universe are two). These couples have been explicitly shown on the show and explicitly confirmed by the creators themselves, and yet there's still people who will argue that they're straight and are just """good friends""".

Mind reminding me who the lesbian couple were on Korra?  Try as I might I'm drawing a blank and I watched the entire series.  Was there a secret Asami x Joo Lee alternate ending that I'm not aware of?

So, no, a characters orientation and/or gender identity is not always important to the story, but it is still characterization. I don't need to know that a character likes gardening, but it helps to flesh them out as a character and makes me relate to them more. I don't need to know that a character is queer, but it helps to flesh them out as a character and makes me relate to them more.

Sexuality or gender preference are in a weird spot because they're relatively unlikely to come up in the course of a standard story/adventure, and even discussions about consensual heterosexual sex are a rather taboo topic (especially in America, compared to Western Europe or Japan).

So I don't necessarily see "Hobby: Gardening" and "Orientation: Same-Sex" as quite the same thing.  Honestly, even though I wouldn't care whether the cast was all-straight, all-gay, or a mix, having that brought up out of nowhere in the same line of thought as "Hobby: Gardening" would make me feel pretty uncomfortable.

Seriously, this idea that some representation is more important than others is counter-intuitive.

Not sure what you mean by this, but if you're referring to my comment that "I think the more important focus is race", what I meant was that it's more relevant to the idea of "should we represent it for its own sake", since it's a physical attribute that can be "informed" to the player without any extra effort whatsoever from the developers, and therefore it's pretty amazing that we see so little of it.

I feel like this approach skirts the issue though. Fantasy is fantasy, so you can have whatever fantastical race you want to have, but is giving some of them darker skin so implausible? Why is naturally blue hair more believable than a dark-skinned person?

It absolutely skirts the issue!!  That's what makes it so useful, or so toxic, depending on your point of view.  I actually think there's a lot of virtue that can come out of it - when there's no way for physical attributes to match, the only way you can compare these characters to people you know is by the things that really matter - personality, motives, actions.