SAS
Can't get enough of FH
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2003
- Messages
- 1,004
Nowadays everything requires a level of political correctness, however where do you draw the line? Two cases have devloped recently concerning World of Warcraft and GUN.
World of Warcraft
Blizzard this week warned Sara Andrews, a WoW Guide leader, to stop advertising her guild ‘Oz’ as “GLBT friendly”, which implied the members were open to the possibility their fellow guidmates were of the same sexual orientation. The reason?
The Stonewall lobbying group, which campaigns for the rights of gay men, lesbians and bisexuals commented:
News Sources: Shacknews, gamesindustry.biz
GUN
Gun, released by Activision gives a taste of the old Wild West; however accusations of racism have now drawn their ugly head.
A boycott of the game by the The Association for American Indian Development has been called for its “harmful and inaccurate portrayals of American Indians”. The group is hosting a petition and demanding that Activision clean up various aspects of the game before re-releasing it to retailers, or a worldwide recall of the game.
Activision released this statement in reply:
News Sources: Gamespot, Boycott Gun website, Activision
Summary
Any media attempting to give an accurate picture of historical events is bound to raise someones eyebrow. The question, however is it right to show these events in full detail? Should game designers lean towards the sensitive and tone down items which could be deemed as offensive?
World of Warcraft
Blizzard this week warned Sara Andrews, a WoW Guide leader, to stop advertising her guild ‘Oz’ as “GLBT friendly”, which implied the members were open to the possibility their fellow guidmates were of the same sexual orientation. The reason?
We encourage community building among our players with others of similar interests, and we understand that guilds are one of the primary ways to forge these communities. However, topics related to sensitive real-world subjects -- such as religious, sexual, or political preference, for example -- have had a tendency to result in communication between players that often breaks down into harassment.
We prohibit mention of topics related to sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game, and we do our best to take action whenever we see such topics being broadcast.""This includes openly advertising a guild friendly to players based on a particular political, sexual, or religious preference, to list a few examples. For guilds that wish to use such topics as part of their recruiting efforts, our Guild Recruitment forum, located at our community website, serves as one open avenue for doing so."
– Blizzard Spokesman
So by advertising in this way it breached the game's terms of use under the 'Harassment - Sexual Orientation' category, which states "This category includes both clear and masked language which... Insultingly refers to any aspect of sexual orientation pertaining to themselves or other players,". However there has been uproar about this case from a number of groups. We prohibit mention of topics related to sensitive real-world subjects in open chat within the game, and we do our best to take action whenever we see such topics being broadcast.""This includes openly advertising a guild friendly to players based on a particular political, sexual, or religious preference, to list a few examples. For guilds that wish to use such topics as part of their recruiting efforts, our Guild Recruitment forum, located at our community website, serves as one open avenue for doing so."
– Blizzard Spokesman
The Stonewall lobbying group, which campaigns for the rights of gay men, lesbians and bisexuals commented:
"This attempt to create a safe, gay-friendly environment should be welcomed, not blocked. Hopefully this is just a misunderstanding. Stonewall would encourage Blizzard to review their policy, to make sure it has effect where it's actually needed. "
In response Blizzard have issued another statement:"For guilds that wish to use such topics as part of their recruiting efforts, our Guild Recruitment forum, located at our community website, serves as one open avenue for doing so… …we will be clarifying some of the language in our game policies in order to help avoid such confusion in the future."
Issue resolved?News Sources: Shacknews, gamesindustry.biz
GUN
Gun, released by Activision gives a taste of the old Wild West; however accusations of racism have now drawn their ugly head.
A boycott of the game by the The Association for American Indian Development has been called for its “harmful and inaccurate portrayals of American Indians”. The group is hosting a petition and demanding that Activision clean up various aspects of the game before re-releasing it to retailers, or a worldwide recall of the game.
"One of his earliest tasks that the game player must complete before advancing to the next level is to slaughter, not once, but on an ongoing basis, Apache Indians," the site notes. "Not only slaughter (and this is the terminology used in the game) but to scalp (terminology also used in the game) them as well with a 'scalping knife'..."
"Yes, we understand that this game is rated 'M' for mature audiences, and yes, we understand that historically, this kind of violence occurred all too often," the group says on the Web site. "No one knows this better than this organization and indigenous people from all tribes throughout the continents of North, Central, and South America. In fact, the repercussions of such acts of genocide are why there is a desperate need for the Association for American Indian Development today. What is of the greatest concern and outrage is the outright, unabashed and implied righteousness of [Gun's] genocidal nature toward Native Americans."
The site goes on to suggest that a game in which players were required to kill members of specific racial groups like African-Americans, Irish, Mexicans, or Jews would never be tolerated, "but apparently, killing Indians is still fair game." "Yes, we understand that this game is rated 'M' for mature audiences, and yes, we understand that historically, this kind of violence occurred all too often," the group says on the Web site. "No one knows this better than this organization and indigenous people from all tribes throughout the continents of North, Central, and South America. In fact, the repercussions of such acts of genocide are why there is a desperate need for the Association for American Indian Development today. What is of the greatest concern and outrage is the outright, unabashed and implied righteousness of [Gun's] genocidal nature toward Native Americans."
Activision released this statement in reply:
"Activision does not condone or advocate any of the atrocities that occurred in the American West during the 1800s. Gun was designed to reflect the harshness of life on the American frontier at that time.
"While Gun depicts scalping and killing, these actions are not directed exclusively toward any race or gender but are used against a variety of opponents, reflecting the realities of that time.
"It was not Activision's intention to offend any race or ethnic group with Gun, and we apologize to any who might have been offended by the game's depiction of historical events which have been conveyed not only through video games but through films, television programming, books, and other media. – (Statement given to Gamespot)
A sensitive subject, and the debate rages on."While Gun depicts scalping and killing, these actions are not directed exclusively toward any race or gender but are used against a variety of opponents, reflecting the realities of that time.
"It was not Activision's intention to offend any race or ethnic group with Gun, and we apologize to any who might have been offended by the game's depiction of historical events which have been conveyed not only through video games but through films, television programming, books, and other media. – (Statement given to Gamespot)
News Sources: Gamespot, Boycott Gun website, Activision
Summary
Any media attempting to give an accurate picture of historical events is bound to raise someones eyebrow. The question, however is it right to show these events in full detail? Should game designers lean towards the sensitive and tone down items which could be deemed as offensive?
