King's Diversity Space Tool: A Leap Forward for Inclusion in Gaming

[Relapses]

Ok? Lol.

I mean just because I think the tool is dumb and is hurtful in the long run doesn’t mean I think white people are being persecuted. This is that same mindset of people calling all woke folks white hating because some of them use it as a tool to actually hate white people.

But this guy has taken it in a very weird very conspiratorial-esq type of direction that’s super silly lol.

It's the inherent problem with this topic; you can't really speak on it from a place of ambiguity. You have to take a side. You're either not woke enough, woke or too woke. I just... I don't know, I'm kind of tired of the nonsense and while I personally don't like the tool or how Activision presented it, I think there's also a lot of people screaming woke-scold and claiming this is a deliberate, targeted attack on straight white males when it seriously isn't that big of a deal.

[Biomega]

Call me ignorant but grabbing a womans ass in the 70s screaming " give me dat ass" likely would get your ass kicked back then.

But that's an extreme example. Those are usually not the biggest problem - because while they are often the most harmful singular events, they're rare, and they're easily identified. What's much more troublesome is smaller things that happen ALL THE TIME to a huge number of people - and that definitely used to be a lot more prevalent fifty years ago than it is now. Things like "light-hearted" physical contact (the proverbial butt-slap), sexual comments about someone or their appearance, and of course systematic disadvantaging based on things like gender (or race, etc. if you want to go beyond sexual harassment).

But let's be clear: even for the more serious offenses like physical assault or outright rape, it was a lot more difficult 50 years ago to get sanctions or help. People swept it under the rug, wrote it off with things like "well maybe she was asking for it", and so on. There's countless examples of this.

Some of it is STILL happening. You say something like "give me dat ass" would get your ass kicked, but sexual harassment doesn't just happen out in the open where everyone can see it. We still have cases where it's he-said-she-said and nothing happens, or where some workers are more important than others and nothing gets done even with extensive evidence. I know a case personally, where a female friend was sent a very explicit video by a coworker; she had the proof in hand, but the company just transferred her to an effectively career-killing department instead and kept the guy around where he was because he was more valuable to the company.

These things still happen. They happen less, but they still happen. And the more sneaky, difficult-to-see forms of harassment, bias, and prejudice are still a damn big problem.

People like to think that just because we had #metoo sexual harassment is now done and no longer a thing. That's far from the truth. It has gotten a lot better since the 1970s (or earlier) but it's definitely not over and done with.

[Syncr]

I didn't say they cared about it at a fundamental level. I said they care about it when its good for business. I'm sorry that you are so quick to condescend and correct people that you didn't bother to read what I said before condescending, but doubling down is weird.

….

I honest to god can’t tell if you’re trolling or not.

For your own sake, you’re just trolling right?

[Relapses]

So are Democrats- and you can get used to that. Btw, i'm an independent. But funny how you think that because someone doesn't agree with your minority left wing world views...that they suddenly get labeled as "right winger" or "conservative". Get out of YOUR echo chamber of wokeness. The world doesn't want what you are trying to force on it.

An "independent" with a penchant for writing impromptu bibliographies about how the world is out to get straight white males while simultaneously admonishing "woke culture" as a partisan talking point. Kind of defeats the purpose of being independent when your values are plainly evident.

[nvaelz]

You can't put people into BOXES that's not how freedom of diversity works, that's how you CONTROL people. You can't create a POWERPOINT PRESENTATION narrative about diversity in humanity because it only explains the creators apparent vision of DIVISION among humanity which let me tell you one thing.

YOU SHALL NOT DIVIDE US. haha.

[Goatfish]

It's funny how you lot say the exact same thing verbatim as if you are mentally incapable of seeing minorities as equally skilled as white people . If I didn't know any better I would say there is a term that describes that sort of mindset. Gee I wonder what that word that applies here was again as it's on the tip of my tongue.

Also prove it, prove that only unskilled labor is being hired in lieu of white folk since that's the claim you're making, we'll wait.

I really don't see anyone except an extreme minority of actual supremacists making that argument. The real reasoning is because of shit like Affirmative Action which makes the assumption that Black people aren't smart enough to get into good school so we have to lower admission criteria to let more of them in. Diversity hiring that people argue about is similar, our society generally has no problems with qualified people holding positions. Fuck, I don't see anyone saying Clarence Thomas is a diversity hire, but when Biden specifically says that he's going to only pick potential justices from black women... that's a different story.

Hate to break it to you but your echo-chamber doesn't count ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Also conservatives are a minority in the U.S. but don't let facts get in the way of your feelings mate.

Yougov data disagrees with you. Democrats are about 42% of the country and Republicans are about 47%, but we could probably get into the nuance of liberal vs conservative which is a different metric. Which Gallup polls ALSO show that conservatism more popular. 36% conservative vs 25% progressive in the US as of 2020. Progressives are just more noticeable because they are constantly shouting for change (which aligns to their ideology), and conservatives don't want things to change much so they aren't constantly pushing for changes.

[Syncr]

It's the inherent problem with this topic; you can't really speak on it from a place of ambiguity. You have to take a side. You're either not woke enough, woke or too woke. I just... I don't know, I'm kind of tired of the nonsense and while I personally don't like the tool or how Activision presented it, I think there's also a lot of people screaming woke-scold and claiming this is a deliberate, targeted attack on straight white males when it seriously isn't that big of a deal.

You don’t need to take a side, that’s not how the world works. Just because you might agree with someone that this tool is absolutely stupid, doesn’t mean you’re on the side of “white people are being genocided”.

That’s absolutely ridiculous and honestly that’s how children think.

Just for example, just because someone on the woke side actually believes we should “kill all men and kill all white people” and you’re also on the side of “woke” doesn’t also mean you’re on the side of “kill all white people and kill all men”.

[Celement]

Do you truly believe that?

Yes. Now you can make the case they were not taken seriously or as respected but I honestly do not believe they were commonly harassed in the 70s

[Zenfoldor]

It's the inherent problem with this topic; you can't really speak on it from a place of ambiguity. You have to take a side. You're either not woke enough, woke or too woke. I just... I don't know, I'm kind of tired of the nonsense and while I personally don't like the tool or how Activision presented it, I think there's also a lot of people screaming woke-scold and claiming this is a deliberate, targeted attack on straight white males when it seriously isn't that big of a deal.

My only question, between the un-woke, woke, or too-woke, does ANYBODY support a tool like this? I would think it would be offensive to everyone for different reasons. It seems to be more to protect the company than society, imo.

[Cyanu]

what kind of clown does such things i wonder...

[Chilela]

My only question, between the un-woke, woke, or too-woke, does ANYBODY support a tool like this? I would think it would be offensive to everyone for different reasons. It seems to be more to protect the company than society, imo.

Given this thread, and the Internet as a whole, I think a very small minority, at absolute most, actually support this in any meaningful degree. Though as you said, people take issue with it for differing reasons, which is where heated debate comes from.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

The Ardenweald thing in the very post you quoted. When I say "That mindset", I mean the "More diversity = more better" mindset, which the Diversity Space Tool is merely a potential logical conclusion of. Are there any companies that use this model, specifically? If Blizzard is to be believed in their assertion that it wasn't used, then likely no, given that it appears that it was developed cooperatively between King and MIT. And at this point, even if it did get picked up by a company in the future, they'd likely not admit to it, unless it was normalized to a certain degree.

A woman/minority lead in a game does not automatically mean "woke". However, if a lead is chosen in some degree to subvert "Straight, white male as a norm" (which can be inferred to a degree by a creator's personal politics), then it's not irrational to have reasonable suspicion of political motivation. While not inherently a bad thing, some people will invariably turn their noses up at it, whether as a result of inherent disagreement with the politics in question, out of desire for the hobby to be a form of escapism from the woes of the real world, or some combination thereof.

I can’t find head or hair of Ardenweald thing so all I can assume is some one said they want equal representation not that they wanted to count all the NPC to get perfect 50 to tally.

And this tool wouldn’t even be a logical conclusion to a diversity=better mindset because as many people in the thread have pointed out you can’t actually get a realistic break down and scoring of cultures disability’s races orientations ect.

You’d have to be a oblivious fool to try and turn all those this into data points and the suits at blizzard are nothing if not that.

[Nymrohd]

But that's an extreme example. Those are usually not the biggest problem - because while they are often the most harmful singular events, they're rare, and they're easily identified. What's much more troublesome is smaller things that happen ALL THE TIME to a huge number of people - and that definitely used to be a lot more prevalent fifty years ago than it is now. Things like "light-hearted" physical contact (the proverbial butt-slap), sexual comments about someone or their appearance, and of course systematic disadvantaging based on things like gender (or race, etc. if you want to go beyond sexual harassment).

But let's be clear: even for the more serious offenses like physical assault or outright rape, it was a lot more difficult 50 years ago to get sanctions or help. People swept it under the rug, wrote it off with things like "well maybe she was asking for it", and so on. There's countless examples of this.

Some of it is STILL happening. You say something like "give me dat ass" would get your ass kicked, but sexual harassment doesn't just happen out in the open where everyone can see it. We still have cases where it's he-said-she-said and nothing happens, or where some workers are more important than others and nothing gets done even with extensive evidence. I know a case personally, where a female friend was sent a very explicit video by a coworker; she had the proof in hand, but the company just transferred her to an effectively career-killing department instead and kept the guy around where he was because he was more valuable to the company.

These things still happen. They happen less, but they still happen. And the more sneaky, difficult-to-see forms of harassment, bias, and prejudice are still a damn big problem.

People like to think that just because we had #metoo sexual harassment is now done and no longer a thing. That's far from the truth. It has gotten a lot better since the 1970s (or earlier) but it's definitely not over and done with.

And let's not forget that a significant number of people work in SMEs were there is no hierarchy. Even in countries with significant corporate infrastructure like the US, about half the population works in SMES and a fifth works in small businesses. If your boss harasses you, you don't exactly have that many options to report them. There is no HR in a company with 20 people and good luck taking them to court; good luck affording it, good luck waiting for a date, good luck getting rehired especially in smaller places were soon everyone will know you as a "troublesome employee".

[Celement]

But that's an extreme example. Those are usually not the biggest problem - because while they are often the most harmful singular events, they're rare, and they're easily identified. What's much more troublesome is smaller things that happen ALL THE TIME to a huge number of people - and that definitely used to be a lot more prevalent fifty years ago than it is now. Things like "light-hearted" physical contact (the proverbial butt-slap), sexual comments about someone or their appearance, and of course systematic disadvantaging based on things like gender (or race, etc. if you want to go beyond sexual harassment).

But let's be clear: even for the more serious offenses like physical assault or outright rape, it was a lot more difficult 50 years ago to get sanctions or help. People swept it under the rug, wrote it off with things like "well maybe she was asking for it", and so on. There's countless examples of this.

Some of it is STILL happening. You say something like "give me dat ass" would get your ass kicked, but sexual harassment doesn't just happen out in the open where everyone can see it. We still have cases where it's he-said-she-said and nothing happens, or where some workers are more important than others and nothing gets done even with extensive evidence. I know a case personally, where a female friend was sent a very explicit video by a coworker; she had the proof in hand, but the company just transferred her to an effectively career-killing department instead and kept the guy around where he was because he was more valuable to the company.

These things still happen. They happen less, but they still happen. And the more sneaky, difficult-to-see forms of harassment, bias, and prejudice are still a damn big problem.

People like to think that just because we had #metoo sexual harassment is now done and no longer a thing. That's far from the truth. It has gotten a lot better since the 1970s (or earlier) but it's definitely not over and done with.

I agree but I'm "arguing" with a zealot who will only speak in extremes.

[Relapses]

My only question, between the un-woke, woke, or too-woke, does ANYBODY support a tool like this? I would think it would be offensive to everyone for different reasons. It seems to be more to protect the company than society, imo.

I doubt it. This entire article screams out-of-touch management who thought they would score an easy social media W with this only (to their abject horror, hopefully) to find out the general reaction is the polar opposite.

[ResentfulUK]

Well given those two examples I think its pretty obvious that it has more bias than it counters. I don't even want to get into the can of worms of how they have a Brazilian and Russian given points for culture while the Swedish dude doesn't get any.

But surely that's where refinement needs to come from? You can't launch a perfect system, it takes time to do. Marking someone based on say Brazilian or Russian nationality deserves to be a point of improvement, surely it is not "unfair" to account for nationalities that generally don't get a ton of positive representation?

Again - I'm not defending this system as a means of generating and building characters, but once you've done the base concept and idea, plugging them into this tool and finding out you've got 0 characters from any other group than simply white, straight and male, shouldn't that be something you'd want to improve if it's not detrimental to your game?

[Razorice]

Why do you need a tool to make characters?

Is the chart so you have all equal number of characters of each race/gender/whatever? You can just write that shit on paper. no need for MIT or tools lol, and also, why?
What is the point of this software?

[NineSpine]

I absolutely love that you are so eager to fight with people, you are even fighting with people for agreeing with you, but not in EXACTLY the way you would like them to have agreed with you.

Going on a condescending multi paragraph rant about how wrong I am, while inadvertently agreeing with me, is not the good will gesture you think it is.

[Biomega]

Again - I'm not defending this system as a means of generating and building characters, but once you've done the base concept and idea, plugging them into this tool and finding out you've got 0 characters from any other group than simply white, straight and male, shouldn't that be something you'd want to improve if it's not detrimental to your game?

Absolutely. Proper data analysis is something every company should be doing, and it's a good thing to extend that into diversity metrics.

HOWEVER

It's a bit of an issue when this is used as a PR tool, because it doesn't really work simplistically. You need a lot of background and support to properly utilize this kind of data analysis, and that's something you do internally. Using it as a virtue-signalling prop does little more than put you into the crosshairs on ALL sides, because there's no way to properly explain to every random audience member how intricate and complex such data analysis methods are, and how complicated their actual entanglement with the development process is. The devs are right to be outraged at the suggestion that somehow they're incapable of designing a diverse character cast without a tool giving them numbers to paint by; that's not how it works, of course, but that's the IMPRESSION created by an announcement like this. Which is why it's such a bad idea to do so, even if the actual tool itself might not be.

And of course there is always the actual danger of paint-by-numbers reductionism where executives think they're smart and push this kind of stereotyping onto the developers. They promise they're not doing that; but who really buys PR promises these days.

[Sithalos]

And this is what happens when you give woke idiots any power at all.

At least some of their devs realize how fucking stupid this is. Whoever made this should be fired, and blacklisted from the gaming industry.