As others have mentioned, that both sides stance is really disappointing, and seems incredibly disconnected from the conceptual foundations of many of their game worlds. It makes me wonder if the initial concepts are intended to make a strong statement, but the concept is politically neutered through some kind of…

Yep I went full Lana Kane “NOOOOOPE” as soon as I got to that part.

It amazes me how hard people fought for games to be recognized as art, only for many of those same people to blow a gasket when people start critiquing them like art.

I tuned out the minute he said there are extremists on “both sides” at Trump’s inauguration. Hard pass on the centrist ideology thanks.

And if they want to put out another, “all sides,” game like Far Cry 5, like The Division, that’s fine. But they can’t get upset when consumers criticize their games for a surface-level engagement with politics. That’s seemingly their stated objective.

No, most of these chodes have perfectly cromulent educations. They love politics in their games, as long as it conforms to their views.

This guy seems sincere but incredibly naive. Video games are going to be a better source of political information and perspective than education and family? Really? And no wonder he didn’t get along with the liberal protesters at Trump’s inauguration as much as with the angry racists attending the event. The angry…

Yeah I find most of the “Get politics out of games” crowd are people that are ignorant of what politics is or consists of.

Well, I think that’s exactly it. They want that sort of initial rush of “Oh militias, civil unrest, that’s topical” but they don’t want to back it up with a perspective or sense of grounding that could even alienate a single potential buyer.

“You see, we have cake. It’s a delicious cake. And we ate that cake. Of course we ate that cake! It was very good. And now we just don’t understand why you journalists won’t say that we still have that cake, which we have eaten entirely.”

Ubisort is by far the worst when it comes to pandering to the “no politics” crowd. You can’t choose a middle American Christian cult that has amassed a stockpile of weapons as your main antagonist and not have anything to say about. In an effort to be “apolitical,” they don’t draw comparisons to real life issues, but…

So much of Gamer Rage(tm) around the idea of politics seems to stem from their actual, severe lack of literary critique skills. A total and absolute inability to discern themes, metaphor, symbolism, and host of other basic....like, 6th grade English education. If you had to read Great Gatsby, your English teacher…

Forming an opinion based on people who were at Trump’s inauguration is pointless. Nobody went.

And there’s also no point to listening to both sides of one side’s arguments are in bad faith.

There was a point where education (presenting both sides, showing the effects their actions have, guiding the students/players towards assembling these and making conclusions on their own) would have been both revolutionary and enough to make the game a landmark in game development history.

This is part of a larger problem in gaming right now where shooting games are the post popular genre in terms of mechanics, so almost all big budgets games default to shooting for their gameplay regardless of whether their narratives actually support constant gunplay.

It seems Ubisofts politics have shifted from obfuscation to horseshoe theory.

Man sleeping dogs was good. Yea there were guns but you don’t mess with Wei Shen and his kungfu!

“He said he’d attended Trump’s inauguration in early 2017 as part of a research trip for The Division series and that, while “I thought I was going to get along with the anti-Trump people a bit more, well, I didn’t because I saw extremes on both ends that are dangerous.””

 “With every game we try to create new mechanics that would be new tools for the player to not resolve to guns,”