I just read two competing reviews of a dragon-based role playing game. And, what's worse, the main focus of both reviews is the political implications of the dungeons and dragons rip off. So, dear reader, after the kind of torture I just went through you'd better read this entire piece.
I mean, this is an actual line in one of the reviews: "healing magic, for example, has been entirely removed from the game."
Anyway, Milo Yiannopoulos and Gabriel Malor both reviewed Bioware's most recent big release Dragon Age: Inquisition.
Apparently while me and my bros were chugging some delicious Mountain Dew Game Fuel (the best of the Mountain Dews) and pwning noobs with our exo suits and smart grenades in Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, Gabe and Milo were slaying Dragons with their swords of a thousand sorrows or whatever. And as me and my bros focused on killstreaks instead of the ramifications of a Kevin Spacey-run new world order, Gabe and Milo were pondering the implications of elves doing it.
Milo seems to believe that the mere inclusion of the option to play as gay characters is "awkwardly jammed-in social justice posturing" and proof that Gamergaters are right. Gabe, on the other hand, sees Milo's indictment of Dragon Age as the latest example of conservatives taking up the mantra of "if it’s popular, we hate it and we hate its makers" and proof that Gamergaters really are all about shutting out gays and women.
For what it's worth, Gabe says he put 16 hours into the game (time any cool gamer such as myself could tell you is better spent endlessly waiting to get in a Halo: Master Chief Collection multiplayer lobby or grinding through loot caves in Destiny) and he comes across as far more knowledgeable about the game itself since Milo's review relies heavily on the opinions of others. That being said, I think they're both wrong about what's going on here.
Certainly the mere inclusion of gay characters, even dorktastic gay elven women, is not proof that Bioware has capitulated to liberal demands for political correctness. As far as I understand, you don't have to play as the gay characters but you can if you want to. It's really all up to you, the player, and that's a good thing.
The fact that liberal activists and mainstream media outlets (I know, I know, that's redundant) have tried to remove the kinds of characters or storylines they don't like is the main gripe of Gamergate. So, the idea that a game giving players more options proves Gamergaters right is absurd.
At the same time, saying that Milo Yiannopoulos' in depth critique of a popular video game is further proof that conservatives can't properly engage with pop culture strikes me as odd. Clearly Milo knows the Dragon Age series pretty well and simply doesn't like it for a laundry list of reasons beyond his main objection to the inclusion of gay characters. And Milo's review of the game isn't some sort of manifesto for everybody who's ever tweeted in support of #GamerGate so I don't see how it proves the movement is really about shutting out gay people or women.
Again, Gamergate is more of a reaction to the gaming media colluding with liberal activists to control gaming narratives. It isn't even really a movement and Milo isn't its king.
I suppose they're both right about the principles involved here. Conservatives should engage in pop culture in meaningfully constructive ways—but they should also resist efforts to censor games with political correctness.
Ok. Now let's never talk about the political posturing of dragon-based RPGs again and focus on cool things like the politics of Halo!