But not Final Fantasy 1. ;)

Also, SaGa 1 (known as Final Fantasy Legend) does as well.

I can think of one small optional area found late in the game that is particularly disturbing. There's also the strange feeling that some players (such as myself) might get on leaving the third major world.

Yeah, blame the internet. Like you couldn't save your comment in a text file and try to republish it later.

Well, Final Fantasy actually *does* have a rather complicated plot involving time travel; the game just doesn't reveal it until near the end of the game.

Look. You already twice supposed me being dismissive. And yet it is you who ignored my notion of the people free choice. To like what they like. To play the games that contain images what they like. To create games that contain images what they like. If some image is "stronger" - more popular, more common, don't you think that there is a reason for that?

Except it IS easy to "break the mould". In fact any successful game franchise does it. At least once. And that's how it becomes successful. It is just devs decide what exactly they want to change and what to make in "common mold". Not you.

Let's skip the semantics and get to the meat of the issue: "progressive" tropes aren't going to fix this broken, unhealthy world, because symptoms don't cause disease. Modern society is almost to the point that human involvement is superfluous, and all we can do is argue about non-inclusive tropes? Seriously?

Yes, exactly. Responsibility to their audience. Which means, again, developers decide what audience they choose. And after chosen that audience it is their job to satisfy the people they have chosen. If audience is not satisfied - that's a failure of the developer.

If devs think that "breaking the mould" will spark the interesto of the audience, if making an unconventional image will offer some new exciting experience - they should definitely go for it. But if they want to play safe - again, that's their choice.

Because, as you've said, devs are responsible to their audeience. And if their work is unsatisfactory, or even outright agered their audience - it's on devs.
I'm just judging by your own statement:

What reason would you suggest?

I hadn't really considered that an audience would like playing games where strong white men are the lead roles more than they'd like playing games where anybody else is the lead role. Maybe that was naive of me.

I hope we're all doing much more with our lives than just this. I don't understand what you mean by human involvement is almost superfluous to society, could you explain for me?
It seems you're trying to say we shouldn't try to do good because the world's too far gone already. I guess I think if either way makes no difference than trying to do good is as good a way of spending your time than anything else.

If you think better tropes = good, I don't think you understand what's going on in the world, and probably don't want to.

Again. It's not true. I mean, maybe you personally not advocating against those, but most people from "social movements" ARE. They continuosly tell, how stories with strong white men in the lead are "problematic" and demure women characters lead to derogatory attitude to women in real life. I saw with my own eyes an article whose author said that he will not let his daughter to play new Mario game, because it doesn't feature female lead in the story.

Again. If you want to make stories for "underrepresented" minorities (and I intentionally use quotes, because who is and who isn't uderrepresented is in fact pure arbitrary choice on the part of you and other people who want social change) you go and make them. Or if you can't, you go and find the one who can. If instead you jsut bombard some developer with accusation of "supporting negative tropes" or hijack well-known franchise to change it into something it's audience will not like - then you are not supporting creative freedom, you killing it.

Gee, I don't know. Maybe history with most of the wars, scientific discoveries and political intrigues made by Europeans? Or maybe it's folklore? Afer all most fantasy is based on medieval Europe setting. How much of African mythology, for example, do you know? Or could it be statistics that shows that on average men are physically stronger then women, so that's why most soldiers in armies are men, so thus high rank military are also men?

Again. I, like most people, don't oppose a game with black protagonist, or asian female protagonist, etc. But if such game is a failure for some reasons, including protagonist not fitting the role, or story pushing some agenda, people shold be able to criticise it freely. Just like developer, who didn't make push for representation shouldn't be a subject of shaming too.

Do you have any familiarity with the concept of "prioritization"?

I don't think this world is beyond saving, though that may be the case. But I am quite certain that we are going to have to do far more than address trivial symptoms pertaining to a culture so shallow and superficial that it isn't culture at all, if we are to remain a viable species.

You're wrong if you think that europe has more interesting history than any other continent. It sounds like you think strong white men deserve lead status in the majority of narratives because they're historically more interesting and hold more authority. Have I got that right?


What's trivial to some is very important to others. I agree that there are more urgent issues in the world, but seeing as this is a forum for a gaming website, I don't think this discussion is inappropriate.
Do you have anything specific in mind that you'd rather we do instead of this?

It just seems like a lot of unnecessary work, in my opinion; like "Oh wait, how am I spelling that word this time?" And although I actually find her (are we sure it's a her?) topics interesting, I'm put off by the whole approach. Not to mention that she (?) brings something up and then often seems to disappear while everyone else carries on with her (?) subject.