Brasas: It's a short article... I'd say there is a slightly revisionist attitude in the expressed argument, almost fetishist of ethnic diversity, in a solipsistic way. Somehow I assume both Ophelia and Hamlet will be black when staged say in Nigeria... then again, they might very well choose anything but Shakespeare...
But we aren't talking about a play, we are talking about a video game, there are slightly different considerations . I too would assume that a play staged in a country would have characters of races that broadly reflected that country, but for no other reason than because that is the pool of people who the actors are drawn from.
Do you assume if a Nigerian made the game, the characters would be black? I wouldn't assume that. I wouldn't assume they would be white either.
Brasas: The bottom line here is a rejection of normality as a concept. It's normal for a majority group to represent itself. The less represented minorities are less normal, but they are not abnormal. Only if you somehow believe there is no such thing as an average normal - we're all special snowflakes! all perspectives on reality are equally valid! 0_o - then you conflate minority status with unfairness automatically, regardless of objective facts.
I don't understand why that is normal or who decides that is normal. I always assumed it was normal for a majority group (and a minority group) to broadly represent the world, not just their own race.
Is it also normal for a majority group to change a historical figure of a different race to their race? (Jesus, Moses, St Nick). That seems abnormal to me, personally.
Also, is it normal for the majority group to be angry or annoyed or question someone who has portrayed a fictional character as a different race (as the writer is doing here)? I don't know that it is abnormal, but it seems strange.
Brasas: Now to finish on criticism, I'm all for the approach of these authors, despite the flimsy historical justification. Cherry picked one might say, but here there is no ethical ground to demand otherwise. The part that seems odd is where lack of diversity is interpreted as a political statement, rather than a reflection of a normal. This is projection by the writer imo, though ill admit it only comes through between the lines. That's the negative aspect of this criticism, it reduces some works to a failed opportunity to explore a specific topic... regardless of the tone.
I didn't read the lack of diversity being interpreted as a political statement. If anything, I guess I could see that possibly the questioning of the diversity in the author's game as being akin to a political statement. I saw the focus of the article as being not so much an attack on games that have white people, but a defence of a game being made that portrayed a character that is usually considered to be white, as something other than white.
It always surprises me how important race is to people. James Bond is a perfect example. Some people were angry that a black man might portray him, because James Bond is white. But those same people didn't seem to mind when Bond was played by an Australian, or someone with other than black hair, or blue-grey eyes or without a scar, etc. I don't understand why skin colour is so important or more important than any other characteristic. Personally, I like to play games with some characters that are not white, a bit of variety or interest, maybe someone who I personally might connect with more than a standard american-ish white guy.
I completely agree that the author could simply have said that she just wanted to make the character like that, but I don't have a problem with people explaining the realities of what things were like in older times. Black people did exist. :)
I also find historical justifications quite interesting. I found Raven's Cry to be a fun example. Gamespot reviewed the game and mentioned language that contained misogyny and homophobia (amongst other complaints). People then complained about that criticism because that was apparently the way pirates spoke and behaved in the 17th century and was therefore realistic, completely ignoring the fact that the language spoken by pirates in the 17th century was nothing like modern day English at all.
