Being openly political in games is "bad for business", The Division developer says

I think he's right. And that's good. The world is shitty enough without having some pink haired freak attempt to lecture you after 9 hours of work.

But what does you think? Should games be more interlecual? Or would you rather just enjoy it, without someone ramming a sausage down your throat?

Being openly political in games is "bad for business", The Division developer says

Capitol offence.

Video games are big business, and publishers inevitably want to sell as many copies as possible. So why risk alienating half your audience by being openly political if half your audience might be turned off by what you're trying to say?

That's the point which The Division developer Alf Condelius made today, speaking to Eurogamer sister site GamesIndustry.biz.

"It's a balance because we cannot be openly political in our games," Condelius said. "So for example in The Division, it's a dystopian future and there's a lot of interpretations that it's something that we see the current society moving towards, but it's not - it's a fantasy.

"It's a universe and a world that we created for people to explore how to be a good person in a slowly decaying world. But people like to put politics into that, and we back away from those interpretations as much as we can because we don't want to take a stance in current politics."

Condelius is COO of Ubisoft Massive, the studio behind The Division - a game set in a stricken New York City patrolled by an armed government militia - and the upcoming The Division 2, which moves the setting on to the nation's very centre of politics, Washington DC.

"It's also bad for business, unfortunately, if you want the honest truth..." Condelius continued, "but it is interesting and it is a discussion that we have, and it's an ongoing discussion we have with our users, of course, because people want to put an interpretation into the universe that we create and they want to see their own reality in the fantasies that we give them, and the stories that the games are."

It reminds me of Far Cry 5, another Ubisoft game, and its depiction of an armed cult in a rural US setting - and the trouble I had trying to get Ubisoft to talk about the politics it might feature - or lack of them.

"If you make the game just about one thing, you're going to miss a lot of opportunities for players to express themselves," Far Cry franchise boss Dan Hay told me in December last year.

"So, there will be moments in the game where characters will talk about stuff and there will be moments where others won't. But the goal is to create it so you can author your experience and if you walk in and meet a character who has a certain view, or certain opinion, they're going to feel real. But you can say 'nope, that's not for me' and you can go off and do this, or if you want to just run off and blow up stuff and have a good time, you can."

Maybe you agree with Condelius, maybe not. Either way, though, pop your views in a video game and they could hurt business.

I think the ENTIRE thing is manufactured from the start.

I think so called 'identity politics' in games is made up, then developers produce based on that made up concern, then talk about how bad it is.

the entire subject is made up, manufactured. to borrow a phrase from Noam Chomisky its 'Manufactured dissent'

He's 100% correct. Wish more devs would follow his lead, like machinegames after the horrible wolf 2.

I agree. politics and video games are a bad mix

I completely agree. Leave politics out of games, unless it is fictional and intrinsic to the base value of the game.

As others are stating, I agree with him. Keep political crap out of the games.

I wish Disney had this attitude, could have saved Star Wars from Rian Johnson and Kathleen Kennedy.

Nah, whatever. Just like movies, book and music. Games can be political too. It's just too many snowflakes, especially Trump supporters cry over pretty much everything.

Moreover, considering EA, Ubisoft, Activition, Sony's game division are posting record setting numbers there really isn't a correlation.

@blackballs: All the companies you listed are moving away from politically driven titles, the fact you even listed ubi tells me you didnt read the op. Only EA (who has taken a beating over the last few months) hasn't gotten the memo.

Sorry, but developers making their art political is just a natural result of the art form reaching a point where it’s capable of being political.

I think there is more accusations of them doing it then them actually doing it.

that said i see what you are saying about Art. its not my personal opinion about the value of Art but I get it and know people who share that view

actually which game is being 'openly political' and what do they consider to be 'political' exactly? because that has been changing.

oh and I should also mention I do not agree with the developer. hand to god what they are saying is exactly what a president like Trump would pay money to have them say because it reduces public discourse in political conversations

It could always be political. You're talking bollocks.

Exactly. The only thing is games are way too mainstream, hence unlike a movie that you know what you're getting - gamers might hate the facr that a game for example like The Last of Us 2 has an open lesbian protagonist. I mean just view the IGN's comment section on the E3 reveal. It gave me cancer.

Thing is most publishing studios aren't really caring. Games are selling in record numbers and they feel like they are willing to lose some business.

Games are becoming liberal leaning. Hence views like homosexuality are being presented. For many anti-gay gamers this is viewed as political, when in reality it's not. Another example, the inclusion of females in BF5 - again, just female representation but some this is SJW.

Notice how these things also bother the modern republican party? Diversity, pro-lgbtt, pro-female rights, etc. I think it isn't political, it's just a trend we're seeing of the far-right being open about their intolerence.

here is the thing and I want to be clear, when I watch movies and they start throwing around sex, violence and try to shock people with gay couples I just roll my eyes and hit fast forward to get to the plot or point

but with that said, being gay is not being political. and if being gay is being political the only way to not be political is to never have a gay couple in a movie (or in this case game) so its a bit circular isnt?

but 'liberal leaning' by 'have a couple that is gay'

can you give me some examples so I can maybe better understand

Yes but most consevative gamers see anything that isn't virtual unrealistic boobs, white male macho character as being political.

No they are not. EA isn't moving anywhere they are releasing an LGBTT game next year. Sony is also releasing an lgbtt protagonist next year. Second, that isn't Ubisofts CEO talking.

first off I think the Right has been more instrumental in claiming politics are in games then the Left has. I think the Right are the ones who gave that feminist more of a voice then she otherwise would, and I dont consider 'shotting nazis' to be a poltical statement but the Right is trying to make it as such.

I think its manipulation by the Right

but regarding gender the problem is if being gay is poltical then it means the only way to not be poltical is to not have a gay person in your video game, which is stupid

Well, I agree. If anything, I love how gaming companies are just laughing at the right considering it's not slowing down sales. I just love how Sony had on their press conference 2 lesbians kissing that was the ultimate laugh factor for the right.

@uninspiredcup said:

I think he's right. And that's good. The world is shitty enough without having some pink haired freak attempt to lecture you after 9 hours of work.

But what does you think? Should games be more interlecual? Or would you rather just enjoy it, without someone ramming a sausage down your throat?

Being openly political in games is "bad for business", The Division developer says

Capitol offence.

Video games are big business, and publishers inevitably want to sell as many copies as possible. So why risk alienating half your audience by being openly political if half your audience might be turned off by what you're trying to say?

That's the point which The Division developer Alf Condelius made today, speaking to Eurogamer sister site GamesIndustry.biz.

"It's a balance because we cannot be openly political in our games," Condelius said. "So for example in The Division, it's a dystopian future and there's a lot of interpretations that it's something that we see the current society moving towards, but it's not - it's a fantasy.

"It's a universe and a world that we created for people to explore how to be a good person in a slowly decaying world. But people like to put politics into that, and we back away from those interpretations as much as we can because we don't want to take a stance in current politics."

Condelius is COO of Ubisoft Massive, the studio behind The Division - a game set in a stricken New York City patrolled by an armed government militia - and the upcoming The Division 2, which moves the setting on to the nation's very centre of politics, Washington DC.

"It's also bad for business, unfortunately, if you want the honest truth..." Condelius continued, "but it is interesting and it is a discussion that we have, and it's an ongoing discussion we have with our users, of course, because people want to put an interpretation into the universe that we create and they want to see their own reality in the fantasies that we give them, and the stories that the games are."

It reminds me of Far Cry 5, another Ubisoft game, and its depiction of an armed cult in a rural US setting - and the trouble I had trying to get Ubisoft to talk about the politics it might feature - or lack of them.

"If you make the game just about one thing, you're going to miss a lot of opportunities for players to express themselves," Far Cry franchise boss Dan Hay told me in December last year.

"So, there will be moments in the game where characters will talk about stuff and there will be moments where others won't. But the goal is to create it so you can author your experience and if you walk in and meet a character who has a certain view, or certain opinion, they're going to feel real. But you can say 'nope, that's not for me' and you can go off and do this, or if you want to just run off and blow up stuff and have a good time, you can."

Maybe you agree with Condelius, maybe not. Either way, though, pop your views in a video game and they could hurt business.

does he cite one example of a game in which it is 'openly political' I would like to see an example.

Or is this just creating the impression that something exists that actually does not to a large degree?

I wouldnt put it past it being a massive conspiracy by gaming companies to boost sales :)

I don't mind something that could be viewed as political in a game, but it's all about execution. TLoU's DLC is a perfect example....in Left Behind, Ellie's relationship with Riley evolved very naturally and culminated in a kiss that could've very well be seen as a political agenda, except it wasn't. Most people weren't even expecting it and were surprised, because Ellie's character didn't revolve around that aspect of her, just as any person's sexual preference isn't the core of their identity. It was presented naturally, albeit divergent. It was sweet, spontaneous, genuine, heartfelt, and it was all backed up by gameplay until that point.

Then the E3 trailer comes out for TLoU 2, which starts with Ellie dancing with her girlfriend and kissing her without ANY gameplay......this reeks of an agenda, it reeks of a company that saw the recognition of wading into territory that could be construed as one, and then henceforth it's the main focus from minute one. Yes, we're aware she's a lesbian.....and so what? Does this need to be shoved in our faces from the very opening? I don't concern myself whether someone is straight....or gay. This is ancillary, and it's wholly irrelevant.

I don't mind delving into politics in gaming as long as it's not driven by an agenda. Unfortunately, a lot of the time it is. And the more it is, the more I'm going to push back against it. Write it in naturally, or not at all. Don't do it simply for the sake of being divergent or to exemplify diversity. Do it when it's relevant to what's needed.

Lol this reminds me of that dumb ass games journalist (cant remember which one or for what site) who after playing the game Far Cry 5 started talking about how fun it was to use the flamethrower and setting people on fire, but then right after complains about how deeply disturbed he was when an in game fictional character referred to democrats as "Obama loving Libtards"

You know something is wrong with the world when melting the skin of peoples bones is considered fun but having a political remark in a game from an imaginary character is problematic and disturbing.

How can you not mock these people, i'm not surprised some developers want to avoid the situation entirely, people are morons and cant be trusted to be either reasonable or rational,.

This is the thing about politics on this message board. It's brought up every ten seconds but always to denounce it's recognition within the sphere of games.

It is f*cking stupid to deny politics are in everything whether you like it or not.

The Division is a game about forcibly controlling a political boundary. That is also called a border or country.

That is about as political as you can get I think. How this armed struggle is depicted will naturally be a reflection of the viewpoint of the storytellers.

In this case, Andy McNabb reading machine gunning firing crazy rednecks from the Southern States depicting their favorite baddy of the hour, the arab. No doubt.

You can't get angry about the existence of politics and demand only the politics you like are included on the open market.

Also why does argument on this forum take the extreme that you are going to get a 9 hour lecture from some poser teenager who don't know sh*t because people have to be considered because politics is in everything and if you deny it's existence you are just giving editorial control directly to the publisher who is probably a redneck.

"It's a universe and a world that we created for people to explore how to be a good person in a slowly decaying world.

Basically what he is saying here is, by good person he means killing bad guys with guns I would say shooting someone is a political statement.

All games are political even even it's a made up world.

Ultima 4 had a moral code you needed to stick to to finish the game. Different creatures were considered neutral good or evil but the subtext was always within the sphere of conflict wherein the conflict was actually with human nature, weirdly enough. But more often than not it's a giant demon lord who wants to put buskers on every street corner and ban fun or something.

But any game which depicts reality and humans in conflict must by definition include politics within it's storyline to establish the reason for the conflict which is almost always based upon ideological struggles or resource based warfare which defines the foreign policy of said demon overlord/arch villain.

So when you include people you are curious, what country are they from? What gender are they? Are they young or old? All that is politics because how people view those people affects those people being depicted in the real world as those depictions will be stored in memory for reference whether you see them as as biased or not. So people might get a bit bored of being the bad guys. Arabs are pissed off. They want it to be Lithuanians or something and get some good parts in movies for a change.

Sean Bean can still keep dying as the idiot northern brit guy though, I don't mind that.

@blackballs: So basically you have Tlou 2 and EA, whom I already said didn't get the memo. Smart to take far cry out of that post since it avoided taking political sides like the plague. You'd know that if you actually played it.

Well, it's actually political, I took it out because for the right conservative bigots it might not be. According to your logic "political" means anything not white, christian, male.

In reality, politics is a very diverse subjects, but again according to your logic Political = lgbtt, women, blacks, immigrants.

@blackballs: Of please lefties don't get to call anyone snowflakes. Your the ones trying to ban memes for **** sake.

Okay, snowflake.

@blackballs: Dont you have a safe space to go to?

ok desperate attacks aside

think about this for a second.

if having a gay couple in a video game is political then the only way to not be political is to not have a gay couple in your video game.

right?

@blackballs: Lol, wow. Your hyperbole and conjecture only makes you look the fool. Putting words in my mouth and trying to paint a false narrative makes you a loser, friend. Now try reading and comprehending the op again.

Politics is only an issue when the views are not shared. Its only because more "non traditional" views are more prominent are we seeing more "concern" about politics in game.

Ignore the NPC's brah, not worth the time to argue, let's just chill and play some games.

@tryit: Trying to explain anything to you is pointless.

How is this political-themed thread belongs in System Wars? Why is it not posted in the Political Gamers forum?

@FireEmblem_Man: Haha so true!

stop being a victim.

if having a gay couple in a video game is political then the only way to not be political is to not have a gay couple in your video game.

see the huge problem? its circular

so give me a concrete example of a developer injecting politics into his game

Because arguing with you, is always circular! When we prove you wrong, you repeat the same crap and say we're wrong and bigotted, and when providing sources or evidence you deny it and keep spewing the same bs over.

@tryit: The left plays the victim. You were the ones that bitch and rallied about more representation in games and continue to do so. So please come up with your own shit. Victim mentality, snowflakes those are solid characteristics of the left. I know you are incapable of original thought but please come up with your own shit.

Examples? ND is one and I'm pretty sure we have discussed this before.

what the **** is ND?

can you give the the name of a game, point to me to the specific place that is political and why it is political instead of just saying "ND" whatever the **** that means.

and is having a gay couple in your video game being political?

@tryit: Naughty Dog... the developer.

If you really do want to understand please watch this video.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DsZwYCgNkmFY&ved=2ahUKEwjnnuLQtI7eAhXRoFMKHYgpDuwQwqsBMAB6BAgJEAU&usg=AOvVaw3uhmxP9o6RWp0SxNROiWhC

If you don't want to watch it then don't waste my time.

@tryit: Why is it anybodies reponsibility to explain games to you that you never have and never will play?

goddamnit

not a DEVELOPER...a GAME!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I dont care what a developers poltics are they can be any poltical they want to , the question is, IN THE GAME...where is the politics, point to it.

**** do people around here even play games anymore.

also..

does having a gay couple in your video game make that aspect political?

I want a specific concrete example of a game and exactly how that game is being political I do not and will not accept abstractions to the question

Answer my question. Is the The Last of Us 2, political?

Trying to explain anything to you is like eating diarrhea.

@tryit: Your boring me. Stop being such a simpleton. Just watch the video and get a general idea of what's wrong with game developers.