Do you feel that such subjects should also remain outside the mandate of, say, literature? Television? Movies? Performance art? "I just want to read my book and not have to worry about social issues"? Because if you think gaming is some kind of exception to the use of creative media to explore social issues, I've got some tremendously bad news for you: It's not, and in general, only the people with the privilege not to care about such subjects in the real world want to ensure it stays out of gaming.
Yes i draw quite a line to a game and literature (namely books, comics are a different topic).
"Movies? Performance art" , are encapsulated products (given they arent continues series) and if you have an audience for whatever message or topic you want to have in that product, it might sell or it might fail miserably.
Every product has expectations and messages. And each evolution of a product has to make a choice if they want to change these messages, which always means you will change expectations shortly after ; which will disappoint people, or attract new people, and if the net gain is negative, its a bad change for your product. And if the net gain is pretty much 0 you also invested effort into something that has no gain at all. So making changes you better be sure it has a positive effect, otherwise its a terrible move to make (at least if you make your product in a business to make money ; if its just education material, or a product out of ideology, it operates on a different spectrum with other rules).
Especially games for children should actively avoid to carry political / sexual messages, its simply the wrong place to put these messages into. You can still do it, but you have to be aware what that means, what effect it has, and if that only means to influence children with ideology, then yes, this has NO PLACE in these products as it only does harm, no matter if the intentions are supposedly good, in the end its unnecessary and easy to avoid.
----
Say the Harry Potter story is loved by people and the author decides to throw in a gay couple. On its own thats not an issue, however, you have to be aware that a non-zero part of your readers are kids and others might be highly uncomfortable reading that (beside that its even outright illegal in other countries, which is its entire own issue).
So you have to question WHY that topic is introduced at all. Its not necessary to a story, then you have made the choice to "force" the topic into your narrative and it will guaranteed produce negative feedback ; and the author choose to go that way, they are blatantly ignorant if they are surprised of the negative feedback.
That said, if you can avoid obvious cultural controversial topics, and you can easily do so, then AVOID IT. Ignorant this will fuel hate and negative consequences, and you simply have to be aware of it.
That doesnt mean you have to avoid the topics everywhere and they are "banned" topics. You can discuss them in an adult way, on its own product, or in more scientific literature ; thats the place to do the discussion in a healthy way, as the setting itself threads itself with the level of competence it requires.
----
This means, keep these topics out of Magic as a card game.
Ideology in any way has no place in the game.
If you are aware something bothers people, you have to make a choice between "print it anyway" or "avoid it".
On the religion topic WotC choose to avoid it, no more real life religion in the card game, good for everyone, as "print it anyway" does not do anything good to anybody and will only fuel the hate-train.
In short, if you make a statement or a choice of behavior its always a good idea to think about if its appropriate and if it will make others feel uncomfortable ; and if you can avoid it, avoid it ; there is no need to start problems just out of ignorance.
Say the Harry Potter story is loved by people and the author decides to throw in a gay couple. On its own thats not an issue, however, you have to be aware that a non-zero part of your readers are kids and others might be highly uncomfortable reading that (beside that its even outright illegal in other countries, which is its entire own issue).
So you have to question WHY that topic is introduced at all. Its not necessary to a story, then you have made the choice to "force" the topic into your narrative and it will guaranteed produce negative feedback ; and the author choose to go that way, they are blatantly ignorant if they are surprised of the negative feedback.
That said, if you can avoid obvious cultural controversial topics, and you can easily do so, then AVOID IT. Ignorant this will fuel hate and negative consequences, and you simply have to be aware of it.
That doesnt mean you have to avoid the topics everywhere and they are "banned" topics. You can discuss them in an adult way, on its own product, or in more scientific literature ; thats the place to do the discussion in a healthy way, as the setting itself threads itself with the level of competence it requires.
Emphasis mine.
So, please correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that there shouldn't be a gay couple in a story unless it has an explicit effect on the story? So the only place it can be introduced into mainstream society is in scientific literature, or 'gay' literature?
Ask the right/wrong people and you'll hear about how every community is the most "toxic". There are pricks who play MTG and there are pricks who play other games; all you can do is lead by example and call people out on their bull***** if they're putting others down or just stirring the ***** pot. Engross yourself in the Yugioh community for a few days and you'll come back thinking every MTG player is Mother Theresa.
Say the Harry Potter story is loved by people and the author decides to throw in a gay couple. On its own thats not an issue, however, you have to be aware that a non-zero part of your readers are kids and others might be highly uncomfortable reading that (beside that its even outright illegal in other countries, which is its entire own issue).
So you have to question WHY that topic is introduced at all. Its not necessary to a story, then you have made the choice to "force" the topic into your narrative and it will guaranteed produce negative feedback ; and the author choose to go that way, they are blatantly ignorant if they are surprised of the negative feedback.
That said, if you can avoid obvious cultural controversial topics, and you can easily do so, then AVOID IT. Ignorant this will fuel hate and negative consequences, and you simply have to be aware of it.
That doesnt mean you have to avoid the topics everywhere and they are "banned" topics. You can discuss them in an adult way, on its own product, or in more scientific literature ; thats the place to do the discussion in a healthy way, as the setting itself threads itself with the level of competence it requires.
Emphasis mine.
So, please correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that there shouldn't be a gay couple in a story unless it has an explicit effect on the story? So the only place it can be introduced into mainstream society is in scientific literature, or 'gay' literature?
Yeah I also take umbrage with this post, like how are gay couples any more inappropriate for kids than straight couples? Some number of kids consuming the media are going to grow up to be gay, and the rest are going to live in a world where gay people exist so I really don't see the problem with normalizing it.
Yeah...OnlyOne you and I agree on a lot of stuff, but I gotta diverge a bit here. A story having a gay character(s) isn't bad in itself, but it can definitely be done piss-poorly.
Here's why the community is toxic - there shouldn't be a community. I'm not a member of the MtG community. I just play magic. Once you start throwing around communal terminology you also start creating a doctrine i.e. you have to think this way to be a part. Then people who don't fit into the gradually narrowing definition become outsiders and are considered threats. Hell, we aren't even allowed to voice certain viewpoints on this forum, because they have been deemed detrimental to the "community."
Yeah...OnlyOne you and I agree on a lot of stuff, but I gotta diverge a bit here. A story having a gay character(s) isn't bad in itself, but it can definitely be done piss-poorly.
Here's why the community is toxic - there shouldn't be a community. I'm not a member of the MtG community. I just play magic. Once you start throwing around communal terminology you also start creating a doctrine i.e. you have to think this way to be a part. Then people who don't fit into the gradually narrowing definition become outsiders and are considered threats. Hell, we aren't even allowed to voice certain viewpoints on this forum, because they have been deemed detrimental to the "community."
You play Magic and post on a Magic-focused forum. You're a member of the community whether you want to be or not. I never got the memo about this secret cult doctrine you speak of, so can't comment there, but every group of individuals who share the same hobby/nice interests are generally considered to be a part of that particular community. There's no getting around semantics.
Yeah I also take umbrage with this post, like how are gay couples any more inappropriate for kids than straight couples? Some number of kids consuming the media are going to grow up to be gay, and the rest are going to live in a world where gay people exist so I really don't see the problem with normalizing it.
You can question if "normalizing" is appropriate here at all.
Theres quite a difference between acceptance and checklist style design of "we need this and that to please group A, B, C".
I see a huge problem in the checklist style design as it kills artistic freedom and replaces it with self induced requirements that only hurt the process and make a much worse product (as people will clearly identify these checklist characteristics and question whats the point of it, while the opposition will fall back to a response of "Representation matters" of all kinds of stuff).
I mean, whats the "sexuality" of Karn ? I dont know, i dont care, and i dont even want to know. If it would be promoted big, and its unpleasant to people you have to question why its done in the first place.
Thats the point i want to make, keep sexuality and all the controversial topics like real life religion, politics, gender, out of the game, keep a focus on the game and do not put in controversial topics if you can avoid it (as these are never important for the story, and you can freely choose to not approach them, as its simply the wrong place and product to do so).
For controversial topics you will always get people that slip into extremes and some people instantly feel personally attacked and make ridiculous claims and statements that will only provoke more and more aggressive responses.
Thats exactly what happens if you introduce these checklist elements to a game like Magic.
Make a character gay. Some claim thats good, "representation hurray", others will feel uncomfortable, and ignoring that will only put the burden on them and ignorance for that is not going to help anybody.
If its truly relevant for a story or a character to be gay, thats when it is used best and most accepted by people, as it enriches the character and the net gain is positive. If a character is simply gay for the sake of it, as the set "needs" a gay character as designers need to check that check mark of the list of so called minority inclusion, thats when its outright TERRIBLE and people will inevitable identify it and negative feedback is guaranteed ; and that negative feedback stands directly against the positive intention of the inclusion, as it will fuel hate against the character.
Its like making a character a Nazi just for the sake of it. People will hate that character, even if its not relevant for anything. If its not important for the story that the character is branded as a Nazi, dont do it, especially not on a game for kids. Making a character a nazi will without a doubt make people discuss that character, and its very likely that these discussion will very easily result in very drastic aggression and hate ; and that can all be avoided if the character is not branded as a Nazi in the first place, simple as that.
If you make a product that is aware to produce exactly that kind of controversial arguments, its an entire different story, but then that kind of product is produced for a more adult viewership, if kids are involved, keep controversial material out of it, keeps everything on a more neutral ground and focuses on the game instead of reflecting to these topics.
----
Forcing topics into a game is a force that will result in damage.
You have to question if its reasonable to do that and if avoiding it to make the product less likely to spark controversial viewpoints.
Which is EXACTLY why real life politics and religion are INTENTIONALLY kept out of the game, and thats unquestionable the correct move to make for a game that a broad consumer group is buying internationally.
You play Magic and post on a Magic-focused forum. You're a member of the community whether you want to be or not. I never got the memo about this secret cult doctrine you speak of, so can't comment there, but every group of individuals who share the same hobby/nice interests are generally considered to be a part of that particular community. There's no getting around semantics.
The "issue" with the term "community" is that it claims that there is only 1 big group and all fit in that group.
Magic is a topic but it does not have a "community" perse , it has a lot of people playing the game, but they dont rally under a single community flag. People that are very interested in tournaments are very different from people that just play casually at home, and others again might play only in stores at FNM and experience a completely different community compared to someone that plays only online.
So you are a member of "a" magic community , but not "the" magic community.
WotC rarely does that distinction and people miss it too. So for almost any topic there is not a universal consensus and probably even completely the opposite.
We all play the game, and on that we have common ground. And as long as no other topics are involved, we probably all can play the game and enjoy our time together (even if some might not believe that).
The funny thing is, you might play Magic with people that you would downright HATE if you knew what they did outside of the game.
People with different political believes can play magic together, as political believe is kept away from the game, and the time you spend together playing its not relevant.
If the game would MAKE it relevant, you might not be able to play the game with that person anymore.
That is the total opposite of making the game more approachable or inclusive.
There is a very real gain if the game keeps a focus on the game and elements that are truly necessary for the game and avoid any other controversial topics that would deflect from that (and avoid all the collateral damage involved in that).
If a character is simply gay for the sake of it, as the set "needs" a gay character as designers need to check that check mark of the list of so called minority inclusion, thats when its outright TERRIBLE and people will inevitable identify it and negative feedback is guaranteed ; and that negative feedback stands directly against the positive intention of the inclusion, as it will fuel hate against the character.
I mean, I remember people getting super mad at Alesha even though her character intro chapter in Tarkir was written to explain the Mardu concept of identity and formed a key bit of world building...
I mean, right now you're arguing that the real life politics of hetero-normative behavior and suppression of queer identities must be represented in MTG's story, which seems like a pretty major restriction on artistic freedom, but what the hell do I know, I'm just a semiprofessional writer.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“Tell me who you walk with, and I'll tell you who you are.” Esmeralda Santiago Art is life itself.
I mean, I remember people getting super mad at Alesha even though her character intro chapter in Tarkir was written to explain the Mardu concept of identity and formed a key bit of world building...
I mean, right now you're arguing that the real life politics of hetero-normative behavior and suppression of queer identities must be represented in MTG's story, which seems like a pretty major restriction on artistic freedom, but what the hell do I know, I'm just a semiprofessional writer.
In magic sexuality is pretty much completely meaningless so you can avoid it pretty much all the time.
It doesnt matter if a creature or planeswalker is male/female, it changes nothing to that card.
Alesha is a prime example of a character that would totally work without its transsexual vibe, that would avoid all the negative hate it sparked and would ultimately make the character much more accepted.
Artistic freedom is one thing, but you have to be aware that this kind of controversial topics will always result in potentially very heated discussions or downright get out of control ; and as an artist for a game you have to question if that is "necessary" , or can simply be avoided for the sake of keeping stuff neutral in aggression potential.
----
The sad part is that a lot of artists will not question it at all and the result is that a game shifts into a direction of the political and gender/sexuality spectrum that sparks the opposition.
The more you drift from the neutral fantasy world into that territory the more harsh the negative feedback becomes , which ultimately hurts the positive message you want to send as its simply the wrong approach to shove it into peoples mouth, just dont do it at all (and even if you do it, dont make it a "big" topic and do not promote it, as taking sides will only produce a "front-line" in a skirmish), the net gain is more positive.
Public Mod Note
(Airithne):
Infraction for ignoring a moderator request.
There's nothing on the card Alesha itself that indicates any of that information. If you just want to play the game, no one is forcing it down your throat.
Also how do you know that "this stuff was included to check boxes"? I mean, maybe, but maybe that's what the story artists wanted to do (seems pretty likely) and they were given the freedom to do it?
At least in my opinion, magic: the story has always been pretty weak. The plot follows absurd fantasy logic, the characters are mostly pretty stock (sort of inevitable when you're trying to align them with their colors), the writing quality itself is pretty amateur, and it's all subservient to the needs of the game so the plot meanders fairly randomly with few satisfying conclusions. I think it's useful for their to be a story somewhere, to give a sense of depth to the game through the flavor text and art and stuff, but it's not really worth interacting with up close. While wotc has done a solid job of conveying important story beats through the cards, the story articles and whatnot only really show the weaknesses of the story rather than enhancing it. If you're actually bothered by any of it, then maybe just stop reading it. Because it sounds like you're going out of your way to find things you object to.
Theres quite a difference between acceptance and checklist style design of "we need this and that to please group A, B, C".
I see a huge problem in the checklist style design as it kills artistic freedom and replaces it with self induced requirements that only hurt the process and make a much worse product (as people will clearly identify these checklist characteristics and question whats the point of it, while the opposition will fall back to a response of "Representation matters" of all kinds of stuff).
You’ve mentioned this “checklist style design” a lot. Is there anything from Wizards that says they use a checklist? I haven’t seen one. Again, I’d really like to read that article if you can give it to me,
I mean, whats the "sexuality" of Karn ? I dont know, i dont care, and i dont even want to know. If it would be promoted big, and its unpleasant to people you have to question why its done in the first place.
Cool. It doesn’t matter to you. That’s fine. Why should you fight so hard against other people when it matters to them?
Make a character gay. Some claim thats good, "representation hurray", others will feel uncomfortable, and ignoring that will only put the burden on them and ignorance for that is not going to help anybody.
If its truly relevant for a story or a character to be gay, thats when it is used best and most accepted by people, as it enriches the character and the net gain is positive. If a character is simply gay for the sake of it, as the set "needs" a gay character as designers need to check that check mark of the list of so called minority inclusion, thats when its outright TERRIBLE and people will inevitable identify it and negative feedback is guaranteed ; and that negative feedback stands directly against the positive intention of the inclusion, as it will fuel hate against the character.
Right. So back to my original reply, characters should be straight unless being gay has a dramatic effect on the story?
Ok. Why must they be straight? Using your words, there’s a non-zero part of the population who will be uncomfortable with that. They should all be asexual…
Oh wait.
That’s bringing politics into the game, right? That’s another thing on your checklist.
Its like making a character a Nazi just for the sake of it. People will hate that character, even if its not relevant for anything. If its not important for the story that the character is branded as a Nazi, dont do it, especially not on a game for kids. Making a character a nazi will without a doubt make people discuss that character, and its very likely that these discussion will very easily result in very drastic aggression and hate ; and that can all be avoided if the character is not branded as a Nazi in the first place, simple as that.
If you make a product that is aware to produce exactly that kind of controversial arguments, its an entire different story, but then that kind of product is produced for a more adult viewership, if kids are involved, keep controversial material out of it, keeps everything on a more neutral ground and focuses on the game instead of reflecting to these topics.
Wait.
Really?
You are seriously equating gay people with Nazis? Really?
So, people who love people with the same set of genitals as them are equal to a political group that actively attempted genocide, and has people around the world who still espouse genocide. Those two groups are equal in your mind? The reaction to gay people and Nazis should be the same?
Forcing topics into a game is a force that will result in damage.
You have to question if its reasonable to do that and if avoiding it to make the product less likely to spark controversial viewpoints.
Which is EXACTLY why real life politics and religion are INTENTIONALLY kept out of the game, and thats unquestionable the correct move to make for a game that a broad consumer group is buying internationally.
Here’s the thing. It is reasonable. I’m a white, middle-class, male, aged 25-40. I have no issues with the way people are portrayed on the cards. Alesha’s trans? That’s cool. Kyanios and Tiro are gay? That’s cool. Lyra has dark skin? Ok. There are dark skinned knights in Benalia? Can’t say I noticed.
You keep shouting about how politics need to be kept out of the game, but to you, having a gay person portrayed is a political statement. It’s not. Representation is not political.
If you or anyone who agrees with you reads my comments, I would like to know one thing above all else.
If including non-white, non-straight, non-male, non-cis, people is a political statement, what is the non-political stance?
Yes i draw quite a line to a game and literature (namely books, comics are a different topic).
"Movies? Performance art" , are encapsulated products (given they arent continues series) and if you have an audience for whatever message or topic you want to have in that product, it might sell or it might fail miserably.
Every product has expectations and messages. And each evolution of a product has to make a choice if they want to change these messages, which always means you will change expectations shortly after ; which will disappoint people, or attract new people, and if the net gain is negative, its a bad change for your product. And if the net gain is pretty much 0 you also invested effort into something that has no gain at all. So making changes you better be sure it has a positive effect, otherwise its a terrible move to make (at least if you make your product in a business to make money ; if its just education material, or a product out of ideology, it operates on a different spectrum with other rules).
Especially games for children should actively avoid to carry political / sexual messages, its simply the wrong place to put these messages into. You can still do it, but you have to be aware what that means, what effect it has, and if that only means to influence children with ideology, then yes, this has NO PLACE in these products as it only does harm, no matter if the intentions are supposedly good, in the end its unnecessary and easy to avoid.
----
Say the Harry Potter story is loved by people and the author decides to throw in a gay couple. On its own thats not an issue, however, you have to be aware that a non-zero part of your readers are kids and others might be highly uncomfortable reading that (beside that its even outright illegal in other countries, which is its entire own issue).
So you have to question WHY that topic is introduced at all. Its not necessary to a story, then you have made the choice to "force" the topic into your narrative and it will guaranteed produce negative feedback ; and the author choose to go that way, they are blatantly ignorant if they are surprised of the negative feedback.
That said, if you can avoid obvious cultural controversial topics, and you can easily do so, then AVOID IT. Ignorant this will fuel hate and negative consequences, and you simply have to be aware of it.
That doesnt mean you have to avoid the topics everywhere and they are "banned" topics. You can discuss them in an adult way, on its own product, or in more scientific literature ; thats the place to do the discussion in a healthy way, as the setting itself threads itself with the level of competence it requires.
----
This means, keep these topics out of Magic as a card game.
Ideology in any way has no place in the game.
If you are aware something bothers people, you have to make a choice between "print it anyway" or "avoid it".
On the religion topic WotC choose to avoid it, no more real life religion in the card game, good for everyone, as "print it anyway" does not do anything good to anybody and will only fuel the hate-train.
In short, if you make a statement or a choice of behavior its always a good idea to think about if its appropriate and if it will make others feel uncomfortable ; and if you can avoid it, avoid it ; there is no need to start problems just out of ignorance.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Art is life itself.
Emphasis mine.
So, please correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that there shouldn't be a gay couple in a story unless it has an explicit effect on the story? So the only place it can be introduced into mainstream society is in scientific literature, or 'gay' literature?
Link to Discord server where anybody from MTGS can keep up with thread topics while everything is being sorted out with the new site.
Yeah I also take umbrage with this post, like how are gay couples any more inappropriate for kids than straight couples? Some number of kids consuming the media are going to grow up to be gay, and the rest are going to live in a world where gay people exist so I really don't see the problem with normalizing it.
Here's why the community is toxic - there shouldn't be a community. I'm not a member of the MtG community. I just play magic. Once you start throwing around communal terminology you also start creating a doctrine i.e. you have to think this way to be a part. Then people who don't fit into the gradually narrowing definition become outsiders and are considered threats. Hell, we aren't even allowed to voice certain viewpoints on this forum, because they have been deemed detrimental to the "community."
What sorts of viewpoints might those be?
You play Magic and post on a Magic-focused forum. You're a member of the community whether you want to be or not. I never got the memo about this secret cult doctrine you speak of, so can't comment there, but every group of individuals who share the same hobby/nice interests are generally considered to be a part of that particular community. There's no getting around semantics.
Link to Discord server where anybody from MTGS can keep up with thread topics while everything is being sorted out with the new site.
You can question if "normalizing" is appropriate here at all.
Theres quite a difference between acceptance and checklist style design of "we need this and that to please group A, B, C".
I see a huge problem in the checklist style design as it kills artistic freedom and replaces it with self induced requirements that only hurt the process and make a much worse product (as people will clearly identify these checklist characteristics and question whats the point of it, while the opposition will fall back to a response of "Representation matters" of all kinds of stuff).
I mean, whats the "sexuality" of Karn ? I dont know, i dont care, and i dont even want to know. If it would be promoted big, and its unpleasant to people you have to question why its done in the first place.
Thats the point i want to make, keep sexuality and all the controversial topics like real life religion, politics, gender, out of the game, keep a focus on the game and do not put in controversial topics if you can avoid it (as these are never important for the story, and you can freely choose to not approach them, as its simply the wrong place and product to do so).
For controversial topics you will always get people that slip into extremes and some people instantly feel personally attacked and make ridiculous claims and statements that will only provoke more and more aggressive responses.
Thats exactly what happens if you introduce these checklist elements to a game like Magic.
Make a character gay. Some claim thats good, "representation hurray", others will feel uncomfortable, and ignoring that will only put the burden on them and ignorance for that is not going to help anybody.
If its truly relevant for a story or a character to be gay, thats when it is used best and most accepted by people, as it enriches the character and the net gain is positive. If a character is simply gay for the sake of it, as the set "needs" a gay character as designers need to check that check mark of the list of so called minority inclusion, thats when its outright TERRIBLE and people will inevitable identify it and negative feedback is guaranteed ; and that negative feedback stands directly against the positive intention of the inclusion, as it will fuel hate against the character.
Its like making a character a Nazi just for the sake of it. People will hate that character, even if its not relevant for anything. If its not important for the story that the character is branded as a Nazi, dont do it, especially not on a game for kids. Making a character a nazi will without a doubt make people discuss that character, and its very likely that these discussion will very easily result in very drastic aggression and hate ; and that can all be avoided if the character is not branded as a Nazi in the first place, simple as that.
If you make a product that is aware to produce exactly that kind of controversial arguments, its an entire different story, but then that kind of product is produced for a more adult viewership, if kids are involved, keep controversial material out of it, keeps everything on a more neutral ground and focuses on the game instead of reflecting to these topics.
----
Forcing topics into a game is a force that will result in damage.
You have to question if its reasonable to do that and if avoiding it to make the product less likely to spark controversial viewpoints.
Which is EXACTLY why real life politics and religion are INTENTIONALLY kept out of the game, and thats unquestionable the correct move to make for a game that a broad consumer group is buying internationally.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
The "issue" with the term "community" is that it claims that there is only 1 big group and all fit in that group.
Magic is a topic but it does not have a "community" perse , it has a lot of people playing the game, but they dont rally under a single community flag. People that are very interested in tournaments are very different from people that just play casually at home, and others again might play only in stores at FNM and experience a completely different community compared to someone that plays only online.
So you are a member of "a" magic community , but not "the" magic community.
WotC rarely does that distinction and people miss it too. So for almost any topic there is not a universal consensus and probably even completely the opposite.
We all play the game, and on that we have common ground. And as long as no other topics are involved, we probably all can play the game and enjoy our time together (even if some might not believe that).
The funny thing is, you might play Magic with people that you would downright HATE if you knew what they did outside of the game.
People with different political believes can play magic together, as political believe is kept away from the game, and the time you spend together playing its not relevant.
If the game would MAKE it relevant, you might not be able to play the game with that person anymore.
That is the total opposite of making the game more approachable or inclusive.
There is a very real gain if the game keeps a focus on the game and elements that are truly necessary for the game and avoid any other controversial topics that would deflect from that (and avoid all the collateral damage involved in that).
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
I mean, right now you're arguing that the real life politics of hetero-normative behavior and suppression of queer identities must be represented in MTG's story, which seems like a pretty major restriction on artistic freedom, but what the hell do I know, I'm just a semiprofessional writer.
Art is life itself.
In magic sexuality is pretty much completely meaningless so you can avoid it pretty much all the time.
It doesnt matter if a creature or planeswalker is male/female, it changes nothing to that card.
Alesha is a prime example of a character that would totally work without its transsexual vibe, that would avoid all the negative hate it sparked and would ultimately make the character much more accepted.
Artistic freedom is one thing, but you have to be aware that this kind of controversial topics will always result in potentially very heated discussions or downright get out of control ; and as an artist for a game you have to question if that is "necessary" , or can simply be avoided for the sake of keeping stuff neutral in aggression potential.
----
The sad part is that a lot of artists will not question it at all and the result is that a game shifts into a direction of the political and gender/sexuality spectrum that sparks the opposition.
The more you drift from the neutral fantasy world into that territory the more harsh the negative feedback becomes , which ultimately hurts the positive message you want to send as its simply the wrong approach to shove it into peoples mouth, just dont do it at all (and even if you do it, dont make it a "big" topic and do not promote it, as taking sides will only produce a "front-line" in a skirmish), the net gain is more positive.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Also how do you know that "this stuff was included to check boxes"? I mean, maybe, but maybe that's what the story artists wanted to do (seems pretty likely) and they were given the freedom to do it?
At least in my opinion, magic: the story has always been pretty weak. The plot follows absurd fantasy logic, the characters are mostly pretty stock (sort of inevitable when you're trying to align them with their colors), the writing quality itself is pretty amateur, and it's all subservient to the needs of the game so the plot meanders fairly randomly with few satisfying conclusions. I think it's useful for their to be a story somewhere, to give a sense of depth to the game through the flavor text and art and stuff, but it's not really worth interacting with up close. While wotc has done a solid job of conveying important story beats through the cards, the story articles and whatnot only really show the weaknesses of the story rather than enhancing it. If you're actually bothered by any of it, then maybe just stop reading it. Because it sounds like you're going out of your way to find things you object to.
EDH Primers
Phelddagrif - Zirilan
EDH
Thrasios+Bruse - Pang - Sasaya - Wydwen - Feather - Rona - Toshiro - Sylvia+Khorvath - Geth - QMarchesa - Firesong - Athreos - Arixmethes - Isperia - Etali - Silas+Sidar - Saskia - Virtus+Gorm - Kynaios - Naban - Aryel - Mizzix - Kazuul - Tymna+Kraum - Sidar+Tymna - Ayli - Gwendlyn - Phelddagrif 4 - Liliana - Kaervek - Phelddagrif 3 - Mairsil - Scarab - Child - Phenax - Shirei - Thada - Depala - Circu - Kytheon - GrenzoHR - Phelddagrif - Reyhan+Kraum - Toshiro - Varolz - Nin - Ojutai - Tasigur - Zedruu - Uril - Edric - Wort - Zurgo - Nahiri - Grenzo - Kozilek - Yisan - Ink-Treader - Yisan - Brago - Sidisi - Toshiro - Alexi - Sygg - Brimaz - Sek'Kuar - Marchesa - Vish Kal - Iroas - Phelddagrif - Ephara - Derevi - Glissa - Wanderer - Saffi - Melek - Xiahou Dun - Lazav - Lin Sivvi - Zirilan - Glissa
PDH - Drake - Graverobber - Izzet GM - Tallowisp - Symbiote Brawl - Feather - Ugin - Jace - Scarab - Angrath - Vraska - Kumena Oathbreaker - Wrenn&6
Why would normalising women as well as gay, trans, and non-caucasian, people not be appropriate?
Please answer this one. I’d really like to know.
You’ve mentioned this “checklist style design” a lot. Is there anything from Wizards that says they use a checklist? I haven’t seen one. Again, I’d really like to read that article if you can give it to me,
Cool. It doesn’t matter to you. That’s fine. Why should you fight so hard against other people when it matters to them?
Right. So back to my original reply, characters should be straight unless being gay has a dramatic effect on the story?
Ok. Why must they be straight? Using your words, there’s a non-zero part of the population who will be uncomfortable with that. They should all be asexual…
Oh wait.
That’s bringing politics into the game, right? That’s another thing on your checklist.
Wait.
Really?
You are seriously equating gay people with Nazis? Really?
So, people who love people with the same set of genitals as them are equal to a political group that actively attempted genocide, and has people around the world who still espouse genocide. Those two groups are equal in your mind? The reaction to gay people and Nazis should be the same?
Here’s the thing. It is reasonable. I’m a white, middle-class, male, aged 25-40. I have no issues with the way people are portrayed on the cards. Alesha’s trans? That’s cool. Kyanios and Tiro are gay? That’s cool. Lyra has dark skin? Ok. There are dark skinned knights in Benalia? Can’t say I noticed.
You keep shouting about how politics need to be kept out of the game, but to you, having a gay person portrayed is a political statement. It’s not. Representation is not political.
If you or anyone who agrees with you reads my comments, I would like to know one thing above all else.
If including non-white, non-straight, non-male, non-cis, people is a political statement, what is the non-political stance?
My Helpdesk
[Pr] Marath | [Pr] Lovisa | Jodah | Saskia | Najeela | Yisan | Lord Windgrace | Atraxa | Meren | Gisa and Geralf