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
[–] 286 points 1 week ago* (38 children)

“You can fuck the aliens but only if they’re straight.”

Fucking Saudi Arabian govt.

  • source
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [+] -28 points 1 week ago* (13 children)
  • [–] 48 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    Bigots' response to the flag is really interesting. It's like conceding that it happens but that you shouldn't be proud of it, or celebrate it or normalise it like straight romance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -34 points 1 week ago (10 children)
  • [–] 64 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 child)

    It might be a big deal for removing a flag, but for me it doesn’t matter.

    Removing the flag is a symbolic victory for bigots. Even if the game still has queer representation, bigots still get to say, "We made you take down your flag to appease us" and that's a big win in their eyes. Like earlier this year when Philz Coffee planned to remove all employee decor LGBT flags from their locations, but then reversed course after backlash citing, "We had no idea that symbols of support and solidarity mattered so much to an oppressed community!" They knew. They just hoped they could withdraw their support symbolically before then withdrawing their support entirely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 29 points 1 week ago

    Of course it doesn't matter to you.

    Congratulations for not being part of a marginalized group and for being completely ignorant to the privileges you have been arbitrarily bestowed.

    Maybe you should care that other groups are being erased from society by hateful people.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

    It is an action with considerable symbolic weight. It means EA is taking a hostile stance toward LGBTQIA+ inclusivity.

    If I weren't already boycotting them, I would start now.

    Perhaps this doesn't matter to you for a lack of empathy and care for the representation of LGBTQIA+ folks. Try being an oppressed minority group. Or, you know, having empathy for others.

    Edit:

    The context was @thingsiplay@lemmmy.ml saying that it does not matter to them and implying that the removal was meaningless.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 1 week ago (5 children)
  • [–] 15 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    Removing a pride flag is most definitely anti―LGBTQIA+ freedom. Whether the gameplay loop changes doesn't modify that truth.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 week ago (4 children)
  • [–] 14 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

    Removing the flag from Stonewall was still an anti-LGBTQIA+ action, despite gay marriage not being re-illegalized because of it. You are standing on fallacy in saying that the removal of the flag wasn't political because the gameplay didn't change.

    Edit:

    The context was @thingsiplay@lemmy.ml saying that the removal of the Pride flag from the game was not an anti-LGBTQIA+ action, because it doesn't hinder the rights of queer folk.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 1 week ago (3 children)
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

    I did not argue that the flag changes rights. I said that the censorship of the flag (which is a symbol of LGBTQIA+ rights), before or after development, is therefore symbolically a censorship of LGBTQIA+ rights. It carries political weight because it is a symbolic opposition to LGBTQIA+ rights. This is irrespective of time of removal and gameplay. Those are irrelevant to my argument, and you cannot rebut an argument in a case that does not really involve the gameplay or time of removal with the gameplay or time of removal.

    Edit:

    The context was @thingsiplay@lemmy.ml saying that the censorship does not matter because it was before release and did not limit actual queer rights.

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

    when I say something is irrelevant then you don’t accept it

    This is because so far, you have relied on fallacy to make those points.

    a non issue to me

    Whether it matters to you does not change its meaning.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -2 points 1 week ago (1 child)
  • [–] 7 points 1 week ago

    I did not.

    You argued that because it was not important to you, it was meaningless. That is a non sequitur. You did.

    Because it matters to you, does not change its meaning either.

    True. I am not changing its meaning. The meaning of the Pride Flag has always been a simple symbol of LGBTQIA+ rights. Its removal is symbolic of a removal thereof. That has nothing to do with my personal view; I am simply stating the existing meaning, not trying to modify the purpose of the flag as you are simply discarding its symbolic meaning.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] -39 points 1 week ago (24 children)

    I'm not entirely sure the house of Saud really cares about western video games enough to intervene like this. I always imagined they only cared about the money and diversification from oil, "deeply held beliefs" often can be overlooked for the right price. This could just as easily be because of the corporate weathervein pointing towards conservatism, lots of companies have made decisions like this recently without meddling from the middle east.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 49 points 1 week ago (19 children)

    Saudi Arabia currently owns EA.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [+] -39 points 1 week ago (18 children)

    Yes. That doesn't inherently mean they're endeavoring to implement Sharia in the games EA puts out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    But that is literally what they're demonstrably doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 week ago

    "Okay I know ICE has been executing people publicly and it's been on video, but that doesn't mean immigration control in the US is getting more extreme."

    "okay I know Russian military assets are building up along the Ukranian border and they're getting tons of aircraft ready and moving troops and armor across the country, but that doesn't inherently mean they're going to start something."

    "okay I know that bridge is actively in the process of crumbling and a chunk the size of a bus just crushed my car, but that doesn't inherently mean it's not safe to drive on"

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago

    No, that is what EA is demonstrably doing because they have a marketing department and are aware of the massive backlash currently happening.

    Trump, I will remind you, was a rare case of a republican winning the popular vote.

    The western world is actively moving right, last year barely any company publicly celebrated pride, and politicians are actively attempting to distance themselves from being seen as hyperprogressive partisan actors ("woke 1.0 was crazy").

    EA has no values beyond money, their owners have no real interest in the social sphere beyond what makes them money, why would they stick their neck out to please a demographic that is consistently becoming less and less popular in the eyes of the general public?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    Why did they buy EA then? So they could NOT make games? So they could close everything down and go out of business?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    EA makes a lot of money, consistently.

    They are also trying to make Riyadh a tourism centre, sportswashing a bunch, getting celebrities to endorse them, they also own a stake in MasterCard.

    Just because you can buy a media empire to use it to push an agenda, doesn't mean that anyone who does it necessarily cares to.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    Survival. They know the death of the petrostate is inevitable and that they need to diversify their investments while they still have the cash to do so. EA is just one of many, many assets their sovereign wealth fund picked up across a number of industries but leaning towards "tech" in general. From this perspective, I don't see why they would be motivated to involve themselves more than knowing what they pull in.

    Do you seriously think they did this in an effort to win some sort of Islamic cultural victory over the degenerate west? If anything they're looking to dump it all for AI investment now, like everyone else.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

    Do you seriously think buying EA with Jared Kushner is a backup plan to oil? Do you really think EA has enough growth potential to offset oil?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Missing the point.

    Straight answer: no.

    However, as one of many diversification options it'll likely make more money than it cost(s), ergo...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    If it were that simple, we wouldn't be here in the comments section of news about how EA forced the removal of the LGBTQ Pride Flag. The world isn't run my logical people. It's run by pedophiles, economic fanatics, religious fanatics, and narcissists. Everything's getting worse because people in power are deciding to make things worse.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago

    Do you seriously think they did this in an effort to win some sort of Islamic cultural victory over the degenerate west?

    Not even remotely. Nobody brought this up except you in your first comment. I guess my question is why do YOU think that WE think that the UAE bought EA to implement sharia law?? Where did you hear that from?

    And yes, I get the "diversification" angle. That makes sense. But wouldn't that mean they would have to... keep making games? And based on the past censorship needed to sell games in the UAE wouldn't it stand to reason they would want that same level of censorship in games they make themselves? They aren't doing it to "secretly prime people to accept sharia law" but simply because not censoring the games would be against their beliefs?

    That's more the vibe I was getting from people commenting about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    All this tells me is that you didn't even make it through the headline

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Nowhere did they mention factually that SA requested this, as much as they tried to imply it by front loading the article with their acquisition of EA and the Sims cover business.

    Without some sort of public statement or leak, it's hearsay. Them meddling is plausible, but so is management feeling pressured of their own volition, or just one manager being an ass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    This only speaks to how little you know about Saudi Arabia if you think it's going to be well documented.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    Doesn't seem like any of you know much if all you care to bring up is "vicious Muslim dictatorship" without going into the economics of why they picked up EA in the first place. As if their brutality takes some sort of special study to know about that you think I lack.

    I'm tired of seeing notifications on this, give it up you losers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    In case this comment by @Carmakazi@piefed.social gets deleted, this is what it said:

    I’m not entirely sure the house of Saud really cares about western video games enough to intervene like this. I always imagined they only cared about the money and diversification from oil, “deeply held beliefs” often can be overlooked for the right price. This could just as easily be because of the corporate weathervein pointing towards conservatism, lots of companies have made decisions like this recently without meddling from the middle east.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)