Seriously. Every form of entertainment has baked-in political assumptions, and that definitely includes #ttrpg . You might choose not to examine them, but this is an active choice on your part, and you don’t get to pretend that your entertainment is “free of politics”.
RPGs, much like SF, have always been a mechanism to explore social issues in philosophy, governance, and thought. In Human society I don’t personally believe that “politics” can be avoided in any group anywhere. —of course that’s just one man’s opinion.
You can tell what someone’s politics are by what they consider political.
I was astonished at some of the Steam reviews of Outer Worlds after playing it. People proper pissed off that their experience had been ruined because there’s a female side character with an optional side quest where she wants a date with another woman. Like how thoroughly filled with hate do you have to be as a person, to be fine with all the mass killing but suddenly get a moralistic high horse about a fictional character going on a dinner date you don’t approve of.
Sad that Steam are making a comment of their own by allowing those reviews to stay up.
While I haven’t read those reviews, I think the implications of Steam removing reviews would be worse, since they would effectively be manipulating the user score of a game. User reviews are just that, user reviews. The score should indicate what users think, whatever their reasons may be for thinking it, no?
I don’t disagree with the rest of what you said though.
Steam definitely has a libertarian streak, seemingly. I wish I had started switching over to GOG a lot sooner.
How DARE you make your game try to reflect reality.
I disagree, because typically it means someone is racist or sexist and just doesn’t want to see people of color or queer characters. Such people may still be willing to engage with the political aspects of their gaming insofar as they may join initiatives like Stop Killing Games or argue that game devs should be treated better, but they’re just bigoted assholes who can’t handle people of color or queer characters.
Also don’t mistake this as a defense of them. They’re deplorable. I’m just saying I don’t agree with the statement as written.
What’s the political assumption of pong?
I mean I don’t disagree with the sentiment, the moment something has world building or a story or goals that relate to real life non-abstractly, there’s at least a political assumption, potentially an intentional statement. And people just don’t notice when it conforms to their world view. But politics free entertainment can exist, even if being able to engage in that entertainment necessarily requires some sort of engagement with real politic systems.
Though the most memorable games tend to be the ones very intentionally making statements anyway.
Glancing at Wikipedia for any Pong discourse. Found a likely example. Turns out Pong had a bug (read: feature) that contributed to its place as the first commercial success in video games. Quote,
the in-game paddles were unable to reach the top of the screen. This was caused by a simple circuit that had an inherent defect. Instead of dedicating time to fixing the defect, Alcorn decided it gave the game more difficulty and helped limit the time the game could be played [per payment]
So, Pong established the concept of video games systematically favouring the rich. Are we there yet, is that political enough?
There is still no political assumption in the game itself. Of course the moment you consider the means of acquiring it, everything touches on politics, even going to the forest and throwing a random stick, because forests existing is politics, them being accessible is politics, and you being allowed (or not) to throw a random stick is politics. That doesn’t make the concept of “throw stick at target for fun” political.
Alright yes, if you deliberately draw a circle around a portion of your entertainment and say “this is the part I like because it’s not political!” that’s still a political choice, which is the entire point OP is making, ICYMI.
Everything is political, even the choice to isolate one thing as non-political. The fact is that politics are only escapable if you’re privileged to be the kind of person who gets to say “shut up about politics, I’m trying to play Pong!”
Yeah generally when talking about a thing you draw a circle around the thing, that’s how that works. My glass from ikea isn’t making any political statement or assumption in its design as a finished product (unless you consider presumed size requirement for a beverage container to be political, though inherently nothing about it even states its purpose, so even that is doubtful) the process behind its design, manufacturing, and sale very much is political as fuck though.
You slightly moved the goalposts there. The assertion is not “Everything is making a political statement” it’s “Everything is political.” Your ikea glass reflects your social class, the international relations between where you are and where it was made. It may have been made by an oppressed person in some third world shithole (or even sweden!) It may even be a political statement, like a designer somewhere made it curvy because he thinks people are more likely to buy something with a “feminine” silhouette.
Okay, well I’m drawing a circle around how much more interesting it is to talk about politics than whatever this was.
Closest I’ve got, which I’m surprised nobody has mentioned, is the very concept that entertainment is a worthwhile pursuit, and that we aren’t made solely to work. Pong serves no functional utility, which is a statement unto itself.
That said, it feels a bit like a cop out to me, from what that quote is supposed to mean. I’d be content to rephrase it to “any sufficiently complex entertainment has politics in it”. For example, I feel like this could almost certainly be said about stories in general, but I’d struggle to find the politics in many simple children’s books, besides “children should be read to”. Although the more I think about it, teaching all children to read was once quite political.
Children’s stories have tons of politics. They’re almost always intentionally pushing a message of some kind, like “Be nice to ugly people because they might turn out to be really hot and/or magical later.”
We are trying to indoctrinate children though
Pong is competitive rather than cooperative, and I find that very meaningful.
Pong represents the slow but inevitable march towards socialism
That’s a false argument your are making here.
First : it’s a TTRPG group. You can’t have TTRPG without world building, story goals, etc.
Second : Pong is not a TTRPG. AFAIK.
Third : In case you don’t know, people who tend to say “no politics in my gaming” (like gamergaters) actually do a very political statement as for them “being black” or “being gay” or “being a woman” etc. is often seen as “politics in [their] gaming”.Sure, you can try to argue with the words, but it’s not just words, they exists in a context and the context is that it’s a fascist dog whistle.
The statement was “every form of entertainment”. Tbh tho yea i didnt really notice it being rpgmemes so it wasnt super relevant, that statement was surely not just meant for ttrpgs tho.
I fully agree you can’t have a ttrpg without political assumptions
Actually it’s hard to keep politic out of RPG.
In game, politic is what makes the game more than just killing random person you know the Princess who want to escape a political marriage, the advisor looking to become the lord, the church and and the merchant guild trying to gain influence ? All of that is politics. and all of that is what makes your campaign fun.
In real-life, like any other social activity especially if you get wider than a closed circle, politics get involved, your club need to talk with the mayor to get a slot in the municipal culture centre or rent a room in a school. Moreover, RPG tend to have a bad reputation and be not correct according to conservative which make it even more political than tons of other RPG, if you let church and right-winger tell you which hobby are acceptable you won’t be able to play RPG
The politics those people wish to avoid is things like the princess wanting to escape a political marriage because she’s gay
They don’t mind politics just so long as it’s not gender or identity politics
The Irony, is that while at least in my local community, the young generation includes a lot of openly neurodivergent gay/enbi players, I feel like that the reason why the theme is so sensitive for older player is that many of the older player never thought the time to question about-it, you know, the 50 year old “straight” conventionally attractive long term single who always play the other gender, may not just be too busy to date
I’m in a pretty progressive city. My group’s 60 year old man was married to his husband. The rest of us are in our 40s and I’m pretty sure wouldn’t even notice same sex couples or cross dressing (though, in worlds with magic, proper transition ought to be available so no one might be able to notice anything but magician shopfronts advertising sex changes)
I absolutely want politics in gaming. Without it, we’d be stuck in the arcade era. Sure, sometimes I also like to zone out on puzzle games which are largely devout of it. Imagine The Witcher 1 without politics, is there even a game there?
I love politics in gaming, I loved Fallout 3, NV,4 (I still enjoyed it but to a lesser extent), Cyberpunk, and Outer Worlds 1/2. I love it when a game has multiple factions, I love when you get to really understand the politics of a fictional world, and I love stories involving politics.
Yes agree, scheming and politicking can make the game mechanics really work.
only conservatives ever think about this, same goes for movies/shows with “too much inclusivity, and diversity”
Do the world and yourself a favor, and use this template instead.
Done. Thanks for the suggestion!
What template was he using before?
Steven Crowder
they want something that won’t challenge their preconceptions one iota. they don’t care about artists crafting a story, they want slop that confirms their biases.
This douchebag isn’t exactly the most appropriate for this meme.*First draft was the op crowder meme. Good on op for updating it.
He changed it to Calvin, but this comment is hilarious now.
Now it’s like…
Deleted by creator
This template really needs to die.
Edit: this was meant for the Crowder template. Calvin is cool.
Your comment now serms hilariously hostile after the edit.
I came here after the edit and got scared that Watterson did something.
This comment is really funny now that OP is using the new format, please leave it up.
Hah, gotta edit it at least a bit. I’ll leave the original viewable.
I mean sometimes I just want to take a break from thinking about it and larp as “The good guys” for a while
People do not all have the same working definition of “politics”. Many people seem to use it to mean “overt content about contemporary issues”, but that’s not really a good definition.
If your game has sentient creatures with agency and desires, it has politics.
For example, if your game has a king, there’s politics. Having the people accept monarchy is a political statement. It’s not as hot-button as, say, having slavery, but it’s still political.
You might not be surprised if your players react to a world with chattel slavery by trying to free the slaves and end that institution. The same mechanism may lead them to want to end absolute monarchy. They see something in the setting they perceive as unjust, and want to change it.
A lot of people are kind of… uncritical, about many things. They don’t see absolute monarchy as “political” because it’s a familiar story trope. They are happy to accept this uncritically so they can get to the fun part where you get a quest to slay the dragon. (Note that the target of killing the dragon rather than, say, negotiating or rehoming it is also political)
People then get frustrated because they feel stupid, and they’re being blocked from pursuing the content they want. They just want to, for example, do a tactical mini game about fighting a big monster that spits fire. They don’t want to talk about the merits of absolute monarchy or slaying sentient creatures.
It’s okay to not always want to engage in the political dimension. That doesn’t mean it’s not there. If someone responds to the king giving you a quest with “wait, this is an absolute monarchy where the first born son becomes king? That’s fucked up” they’re not “making it political”. It already was political.
If you present a man and a woman as monogamously married in your game, that’s political. That’s a statement. If you show a big queer polycule, that’s also a statement. The latter will ping the aforementioned uncritical players as “political”, because it’s more atypical, but both are “political”.
Some of this can be handled in session 0. But sometimes you learn that some people in the group have different tastes and probably shouldn’t play together.
All I want is more nice unpolitical games like Bioshock or Wolfenstein
And not the woke nonsense of having female or PoC main characters.
Same people who complain about Nazis being the enemy in Wolfenstein
EVERYTHING is politics. It absolutely affects every aspect of life, ESPECIALLY fascism
that’s not politics. That’s just normal people getting offended at things. It’s normal because it’s not possible to please everyone at once so there will always be someone.
