A former BioWare employee says that EA's new management wasn't on board with the developer's inclusiveness.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -9 points 1 day ago (44 children)
  • [–] 10 points 1 day ago* (41 children)

    There is evidence, you just chose to ignore it. You want proof by pointing at instances in the final game, which will never exist, but the burden of proof rests on you just the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 41 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 day ago (40 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago (16 children)

    as long as the game is intact

    Well, the game is canceled so are you done defending bigotry now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (15 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago (14 children)
    1. Yes, you are.
    2. The gameplay, story, characters, and interactions are not longer intact. The game is canceled.
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (13 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (12 children)

    In denying the political and social significance of this clearly bigoted move by EA, you are defending bigots. That's no hallucination. Then again, of course a .ml user would argue in bad faith.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 day ago (11 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (10 children)

    Do you deny that denial of the political and social significance of this political action taken because of bigotry is a defense of bigotry? If so, you are relying on fallacy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (9 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (8 children)

    That is a non-answer to my question. I asked if you deny that denial of the political and social significance of this political action taken because of bigotry is a defense of bigotry.

    Edit:

    The context was @thingsiplay@lemmy.ml providing a non-answer, saying that the removal does not matter much to them. This is not what was asked.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (7 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

    You do not care, perhaps, but your personal opinion on the significance of the flag in the game does not change the fact that its removal was political. The thing being removed was a symbol and the removal was political, therefore the action of removing the thing symbolizes (per the flag being a symbol, obviously) a removal of the things the flag stands for. Which are LGBTQIA+ rights.

    Your personal opinion on the matter may be different were you a member of this minority. Either way, though, I have given you a series of axioms indicating that the removal is a symbolic opposition to LGBTQIA+ rights.

    Edit:

    The context is yet another non-answer, this time saying "I do not care", among other things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (5 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    It is, factually, a political action. Whether it has significance to you doesn't change that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 day ago (3 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    A meaningless action

    We have gone over why and how it provably has political meaning. It is, per definition, not meaningless.

    I can have an opinion without being in the club

    This is irrelevant. I didn't say you cannot have an opinion. I said that your opinion on the quantitative meaning (severity of the meaning) of the action has no significance to the qualitative meaning of the action (the fact that the action is provably anti-LGBTQIA+ in intent).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 day ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

    you invalidate my opinion because you do not agree.

    These are not the grounds on which I consider your opinion illogical. I consider your view illogical because you have declared meaningless a thing that, per definition, has meaning.

    It is, per definition, meaningless.

    It is not meaningless. The flag represents an idea. Its removal, therefore, symbolically represents the removal of that idea.

    Missing flag has no impact on anything.

    We have gone over how the missing flag has a political and social impact. It does not impact the gameplay, but that is not the point.

    It does not affect any freedom whatsoever.

    I did not make the case that its removal hindered freedom. I made the case (with an axiomatic proof I provided earlier) that the removal of a symbol is freedom is symbolic removal of freedom. I did not argue that it is a literal removal of freedom.

    I personally find it acceptable and a non issue.

    You can do this. That is fine. But the flag does, per definition, have a meaning, whether or not that meaning has value or significance to you. And therefore its removal does, per definition, have a meaning, whether that removal has value or significance to you.

    In a bar LGBT people are welcome as anyone else. Only flags representing anyone is not.

    Matthew Shephard was murdered by bar clientele because of his sexuality. That is a digression, but it feels worth mentioning that LGBTQIA+ people are not always welcomed.[1][2] That said, again, this is a digression.

    The issue here is not the lack of a flag. The issue is the political symbolism of the flag's removal. If a Pride flag were torn down from the window of a bar, it would be a political statement. In the same way, if the flag is removed from the game, it also has political symbolism.

    The point is that there is political symbolism. I am not trying to convince you that the symbolism should matter to you. I am just saying that the removal of a symbol represents the removal of the thing that symbol symbolizes. That's the only case I'm making here.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago (22 children)

    Can I ask you something else: Would you consider the hypothetical game "intact" if intrinsically planned queer content was removed from the game after a totally hypothetical request?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (21 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago (20 children)

    I think it's incredibly naive to think that when EA shit their pants because of a rainbow flag they will stop there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (19 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (18 children)

    A flag is more than a graphical element on a slide, you know.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [+] -3 points 1 day ago (17 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago* (15 children)

    The removal request was political. That is the same as if someone were to tear down the flag of a nation from a plaza. Sure, it would be "just fabric", but its removal carries political weight, and denying that is an exercise in fallacy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [+] -5 points 1 day ago (14 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (13 children)

    Flags exist as symbols. That is the entire purpose of a flag. Therefore, removing a symbol is a symbolic removal of the thing it stands for. The Pride Flag symbolizes LGBTQIA+ rights. Therefore, it's removal symbolizes removal of those rights.

    Edit:

    The context was @thingsiplay@lemmy.ml making the case that the Pride Flag has no meaning, and is "just a flag".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [+] -5 points 1 day ago (12 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (11 children)

    Political action doesn't exist only when viewed. Political actions taken against the LGBTQIA+ community are still political actions taken against the LGBTQIA+ community, regardless of whether the game is on the market.

    Edit:

    The context was @thingsiplay@lemmy.ml saying that the censorship was meaningless because it happened without the game being sold yet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (10 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (9 children)

    In scenario A, let us say a journalist writes a report about corruption, and it is censored before being released to the public. In scenario B, the report is released, then immediately censored. In both cases, it is censored.

    It is like this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (8 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (7 children)

    It is not bad-faith argumentation. And it absolutely has something to do with our discussion. The point is that your logic doesn't hold up when cast onto another work before and after release. Likewise, it does not hold up where you have used it.

    Whether the game was or wasn't released doesn't change the fact that censorship took place. Censorship did take place—that is fact—and this censorship was political. Therefore the removal of the flag is political censorship, and has political significance.

    Edit:

    The context was @thingsiplay@lemmy.ml saying that the journalist comparison was bad-faith argumentation because it was "unrelated", despite it being a rebuttal of his claim that the censorship was meaningless because it occurred prior to release.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (6 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 day ago (5 children)

    Because the game was still developed. You don’t know what the replacement for the flag would be.

    The removal of a symbol carries meaning, irrespective of what they would have replaced it with. Also, their motive in removing it had to do with anti-LGBTQIA+ policy in Saudi Arabia, so it most definitely wasn't to replace it with another open-minded option. This was censorship of the developers and, symbolically, of queer folk.

    It’s just a flag in a videogame. I personally don’t care about that.

    What you care about doesn't change the fact that censorship took place.

    people put too much weight into this in my opinion

    You can hold that view.

    the censorship is meaningless

    Symbols have meaning. Censorship of symbols, therefore, is symbolic censorship of the meaning of those symbols. The censorship is provably not without meaning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (4 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

    Again, we have gone over the political meaning. The lack of change to gameplay is irrelevant. The political meaning of the action is the significance, not the evidence of that action to the end-user.

    Edit:

    The context was @thingsiplay@lemmy.ml once again stating that the flag has no meaning, its removal has no meaning, and that it has no meaning because there is no impact on gameplay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -4 points 1 day ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    If we speak about real world rights, then it would be significant. But in a game lacking a flag, I think is not important.

    Again, the censorship of the flag, which is a symbol, is symbolically meaningful. The degree of significance is not the subject of debate.

    The flag doesn’t matter, what matters are the actions and story.

    To the gameplay, perhaps. But I am not discussing the gameplay. I am discussing how the removal of the flag is symbolic of opposition to LGBTQIA+ rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Actually, the same could not be said for Creamfresh. You're the only one defending censorship and suppressing an entire group of people and using seemingly logical arguments in bad faith to make your appalling stance sound reasonable while dismissing any rightfully upset counterarguments. Grow up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment