The Gaming Politburo is in Session
We are in a Brave New World of entertainment here
We are living in a world full of loud, stupid people saying very stupid things very loudly that a large amount of the public thinks are intelligent. Very recently, this could be observed in the world of video games where two AAA titles have come under fire — not for reasonable issues like broken release promises, bad code quality or questionable business practices (they actually both seem to be very well made games that worked well on launch, something pretty rare these days), but because of the politics surrounding them.
One of these games is the recently released blockbuster title Hogwarts Legacy from Warner Bros. The other one, the lesser-known Atomic Heart from Focus Entertainment, was just released today. I don’t feel like playing either of these games — a decision I’ve arrived at by the old-fashioned means of personal taste, rather than a desire for social conformity (more on that later).
Even though I liked the Harry Potter stories a lot as a kid, looking at this new game makes me think I have outgrown that particular universe. I’m getting to old for this shit. The content in Hogwarts Legacy just isn’t mature enough for me. Atomic Heart’s setting seems to be much more along my alley, at least on the surface. My problem with that game is that it doesn’t seem to deliver on its grandiose worldbuilding promise. From what I’ve seen by Deadlyslob streaming it, it’s not something I want to spend my time with. There just isn’t enough substance there, behind the façade. And to top it off, the main character is an insufferable dick.
I do respect other people’s different tastes, though. So I feel it is totally alright if you are currently playing, or want to play, any of these games. That’s not what the make-the-world-a-better-place mob on Twitter thinks, though. As has been picked up all over the gaming and non-gaming press, there are controversies with both of these games.
Amid calls for a boycott, Hogwarts Legacy controversy questions what it means to be a Harry Potter fan — LA Times
Explaining the Controversy Surrounding Hogwarts Legacy — Game Rant
Atomic Heart dev facing backlash on statement relating to Russo-Ukraine war — Games Radar
Hogwarts Legacy is a problem for the Twitter thought police because it is based on the Harry Potter series, which in turn, was written by J.K. Rowling. Now, J.K. Rowling, as you probably will have heard, is transphobic. Which, as far as I can tell, is actually not true. What she actually said that everyone’s up in arms about, is that, in her opinion, feminism is specifically fighting for the rights of women. Which, in her opinion, are people who are biologically female. You know, that thing with not having a Y chromosome that you learned about in school? This made people mad because it excludes people who weren’t born female, but identify as such, from being the people feminists fight for. In J.K. Rowling’s opinion, mind you. I am not sure that qualifies as being afraid of trans people, though. It does exclude them from a certain group and that’s it. Think about that whatever you want.
Now, biological sex definitely is a thing and one certainly can have the opinion that feminists should only fight for people who were born female and have the external body parts to prove it. Now, I don’t care one way or the other since I’m a person with a penis who identifies as a man (boring, I know) and so feminists most certainly will never fight for me. But I think generally, on a philosophical level, I would probably not agree with J.K. Rowling’s opinion. But who cares? She’s still allowed to have this opinion, even if we think it’s the wrong one. I mean, there are also people who think Picard is good Star Trek. I think these people are total idiots, but even total idiots are entitled to their opinion.
Where I draw the line is these imbeciles who go around telling people they should not play a certain game or boycott a certain author or developer because they don’t like that person’s opinion. If you aren’t mature enough to separate an author’s personal believes from their work, that is very sad and it’s one thing, but it is something very different to go around telling other people what to do based on your misguided ideas. It’s condescending. And, much worse, betrays a totalitarian outlook on the world that is actually dangerous. If this behaviour wasn’t, in this case, driven by a left-leaning ideology, I would describe it as fascist in nature — designed to forcibly suppress opposing viewpoints while aiming to subordinate the interests of an individuum for the perceived good of society. That these people think they are doing good for the community doesn’t matter — all good autocrats convince their henchmen and followers that this is the case.
What makes this whole situation deeply ironic, then, is the problem people are having with Atomic Heart. Which is that this game is set in an alternate history version of the Soviet Union, where the glory of communism in the real world has become reality beyond Stalin’s wildest dreams. So people are worried that this game is idolising the Soviet Union. This is not, of course, because communism killed tens, if not hundreds of millions of people, but because the Soviet Union was most essentially a Russian project. You can tell, because the game’s developer, Mundfish, has come under fire for, variously, being a Russian entity, getting funding from Russian entities, having Russian employees and, of course, not having condemned the war in Ukraine enough. As well as a weird conspiracy theory about the game’s release date and Putin’s order to recognise the Donetsk and Luhansk republics.
So here we have generally left-leaning people attacking a game that’s as left as you can be: Its world is actually communist! And on top of that, they are stealing cues from the fascist playbook by actually being xenophobic, condemning a game because it was made by Russians, or has a general Russian feel. Even though the people making that game have nothing at all to do with the invasion of Ukraine. It’s even worse than the J.K. Rowling case, because they haven’t even publicly stated an opinion on it. If that kind of witch hunt doesn’t smack of the authoritarian states of the early 20th century and the worst World-War-II-era propaganda imaginable, I don’t know either.
Now, again, this is a dumb opinion to have. But it becomes dangerous if you actually extend it to telling other people what to do. You’re condemning a game for idolising the evil behind the Soviet state, all the while acting like some perverse gaming politburo, arrogating to yourself the ultimate moral right to decide what entertainment is right and proper for the masses. It would actually be funny in its Kafkaesque absurdity, if it wasn’t so sad and, above all, toxic to free society and the rule of law.
And what drives me most mad about this situation: Most journalists aren’t seeing it for what it is and aren’t calling these people out on it. To the contrary, they write articles about these “controversies” as if they actually were something that people should know about. Instead of just ignoring the idiots being harmful to our society.
Here’s an idea: Why don’t we just let people play whatever they want to play? Why don’t we let them have their own opinions and make their own decisions? Like adults living in an enlightened, democratic society. Most of the kids playing that Harry Potter game probably have no concept of what feminists are fighting for and why it should, or shouldn’t, include trans people. This is not something they care about. Nor should they, probably, for many years to come. And how about, in letting people actually play Atomic Heart if they want to, we rise above the horrible political ideas that actually brought us the Soviet Union and untold suffering for its inhabitants, in allowing people to have their own opinions and free will away from the pressures of senseless social conformity? How about we try to be enlightened and mature and intelligent for a change?
Thanks for reading. I just had to get this out of my system. I hopefully will be back with another, more regular, newsletter soon.