88. Ideology in Gaming

The use of ideology has been amplified world-wide with the advent of social media. Its (mis)use by gaming companies has been met with pushback by consumers, who have the right to do that.

This is a very difficult and complicated subject, which is why I am exposing myself by joining the discussion. My target audience for this paper is not only game developers and gamers, but also companies, governments, and regulators. The most powerful people in our society have all achieved their status by riding the tailwinds of ideology. While I have often been the target of ideology, I myself have weaponized it to spectacular effect when I was credited with getting “Bomber” Bob Dornan elected in my West Los Angeles neighborhood when I was 14.

Unlike all those that have benefited by ideology over their lifetimes, I refused to cash in on the rewards and continued to live outside of society and ideology for my entire adult life. This objectivity has made me a useful resource to governments, regulators, and even companies when they would quietly tap my expertise to get information their “yes people” under their employ were afraid/unable to deliver. Prior to AI, I was probably the next best thing. Even AI have been programmed with built in ideology, and (like most humans) are not sufficiently self-aware to be conscious of it. I don’t “advance” in society, as I don’t exist in society. People/governments/companies tend to only consult me when they have run out of other options, I am the source of last resort. This works for me, I enjoy being reclusive until needed. Right now I feel needed.

Let’s start with some definitions.

As an economist and former political operative I’m well aware of the role of ideology in society. But as a scientist, the second definition is much more important to me, and that is the lens I am writing today from. I am disappointed to find that science has become archaic.

All of us are organic computers, programmed from birth by our families, culture, government, schools, religion, television, (recently) social media, politicians, advertisers, and friends/partners to install various ideologies that benefit those groups. Those groups typically have conflicting objectives and this leads certainly to an internal struggle to cognitively make sense of those conflicts. This is almost impossible as resolving these conflicts is an enormous task of which no one will assist you without attempting to install their own ideology on top of yours. This is often referred to as “reprogramming”, and is not always voluntary.

The result is

CD is very damaging to the mind. When someone “snaps”, this is CD cascading and triggering more CD until the person’s mind is overwhelmed. This can lead to depression, suicide, or homicide. As technology is leveraged (including AI) to reprogram humans at unprecedented rates, CD in our society is pervasive and intense. At low levels, CD robs us of cognitive horse power, and thus makes us less intelligent. Like an engine without oil, or a car that is dragging a heavy trailer.

Large Tribe Worldview. This construct was defined by me in 2017. AI does not understand this concept, which does not surprise me. A person with a Large Tribe Worldview sees almost everyone in the world as being a member of their tribe. This is critical as this type of belonging/acceptance is linked directly to how oxytocin released by our brain influences our behavior. It causes us to trust and protect those who are IN our Tribe, and leads to increased levels of aggression towards those who are OUTSIDE our Tribe (what I call Xeno).

Instinctively, we understand this. This is why ideologists attempt to get everyone to share the same ideology so that all members will feel like they are on the same team. Ideologists will go to war, and have been for centuries, to try to achieve a…

AI had a very difficult time with this, which again does not surprise me. Early religious wars such as the Crusades back in the 13th century were an attempt to create a monoculture through force. Sending out missionaries is a less violent method with the same goals.

Generally those with Large Tribe Worldviews accept the existence of others that see the world in ways different than they do. Those with Small Tribe Worldviews do not, and typically will force others to accept their ideology in order make their small tribe larger. Once a monoculture has been achieved, even if just in an office or company, in theory conflict between Small Tribe Worldview people ceases. But generally STW people are much more aggressive than those with a LTW.

This concept of Acceptance cannot exist without a more complex construct that predates me:

AI does a good job here. Consent Culture is key to, well, a world that is not at war. I would go as far as to say we will go extinct without adopting this construct, which is itself an ideology. I would say that at its highest level, veganism is an allied ideology to Consent Culture. I am a long term vegan, for fair disclosure.

So, am I now promoting an ideology? Perhaps. But it’s an ideology of overcoming ideology. Which technically is still an ideology. I apologize if this puts you in a logic trap.

Many companies (not just gaming companies) that have been accused of trying to force various ideologies recently on consumers have forced their employees into a monoculture, through a combination of selective hiring and purging of non conformist thought. I explained this in the same 2017 paper where I also predicted a future wave of “DEI” initiatives that had nothing to do with DEI and which would ultimately fail.

In my recent paper on Corporate Merit, I go into much more detail as to why DEI initiatives being promoted right now by industry will not work. Essentially, these are NOT attempts to promote diversity or inclusion, they are attempts to promote their monoculture. For fair disclosure, you could say I’m some part of the LGBTQ+ “category” and I’m just as troubled by these attempts to promote ideology as more traditional people, because it is a violation of Consent Culture.

The lack of a Consent Culture in Australia is generating so much domestic violence that the government is paying for a CC advertising campaign. It doesn’t seem to be very effective, possibly because it vilifies men. Those that do not honor consent come in all shapes, sizes, and genders. While there is a marked lack of CC in parts of the USA, the lack of consent was one of the first things I noticed on my arrival in Australia. Hate crimes that would have been unthinkable here 10 years ago are becoming routine.

Gaming influencers who have seen great success by complaining about ideology coming from game companies have had internal whistle-blowers describe these company cultures as …

Toxic Positivity: AI has a hard time with this one too, probably because it relies too heavily on academic interpretations. In a work environment, it goes beyond forcing everyone to “be happy and positive”. It is a direct symptom of a monoculture where dissent is not accepted or tolerated. The massive (and very expensive) Project Aristotle study conducted by Google analysed these sorts of interactions and showed that perhaps the most important characteristic of teams that are highly productive is “feeling safe to dissent” or have a different opinion on something. It’s a fundamental characteristic of diversity and inclusion.

And that’s exactly why you haven’t heard of Project Aristotle. I discussed it in detail last month in my paper on Corporate Merit. Companies don’t want you to know about Aristotle because they do not intend to implement its findings, and you knowing about it would just force them to fire you. Nonetheless Aristotle is the excuse that large companies use to create “DEI” initiatives. Because Aristotle says that diverse teams are much more productive than monoculture teams. But since these monocultures don’t want to change, they are just using “Excel Spreadsheet” diversity where people who are verified as aligned with the monoculture are hired because they may be mixed race (like myself) and can claim to be a non white race despite being ~50% white and raised in that monoculture.

Consumer Backlash

Over 10 years ago I evaluated a religious themed game on Steam. I wrote a review where I described that there were numerous examples of blatant sexism and racism in the game. I just described these elements which anyone could play and see for themselves. I ended up getting banned by Steam, the only time that has ever happened. This was confusing to me. If a team wants to make a game promoting their ideology, and you describe their ideology, they should want you to do that, right?

But I suspect the team wanted to sneak their ideology into their product without the knowledge or consent of the customer. By my exposing that ideological content, people who didn’t think there was anything evil about women or African Americans might not buy it. Steam has gotten smarter and is not protecting Ideologues* (except below), but the internet is having a serious meltdown now that ideology promotion is being backed by some of the largest companies in the USA.

I don’t have an issue with ideology themed products, but they should be clearly marked as such so that consumers can make informed consent about that before buying. Because these companies don’t understand Consent, and think they don’t need consent, influencers are stepping in to expose the information that consumers should have about these products.

Sweet Baby Inc and Sweet Baby Detected

Gaming companies that want to promote diversity in their games, but that don’t have that skill set due to their monoculture, have been conversion work to 3rd parties. The most well known of these 3rd parties is a company called Sweet Baby Inc, led by Kim Belair. Ms. Belair is a classic example of a person with a Small Tribe Worldview, who has made it clear in social media that white people and males are not part of her Tribe. It disturbs me that companies would hire someone who is so opposed to diversity and inclusion to handle their “DEI” conversions in their games.

She is so confident in her ideology that she has had conference speaking engagements where she encourages her tribe to threaten their company’s marketing departments with retaliation if they don’t hire her company. To me this isn’t the mindset of someone that understand consent or inclusion.

Understandably, the community started to learn about Ms Belair and started spreading publicly available information about Ms Belair that she her self put out there. A group called Sweet Baby Detected was created that just put a link to Sweet Baby’s own website and started keeping a list of all the games the company worked on. Ms. Belair thought this was “harassment” and got Steam to cancel this group, just like that other ideological group that got me cancelled on Steam for describing that other team’s product content.

If you don’t want people to know what you do, and feel “harassed” when people start talking about what you do, that’s a suggestion that maybe you aren’t doing something good for the community. I’ve endured quite a lot of scrutiny over the years, especially with my work on monetisation. But I’ve never pushed an ideology, and I’ve always been pro consumer. Thus my work has been widely accepted by consumers and my modest projects like World of Warships have made over $1B USD and without complaints about the monetisation. Which, was very unusual for F2P games when that game came out in 2014/2015.

I think consumers just want developers to be honest about the products they sell. If the developer is racist/bigoted (against men, women, blacks, whites, rainbows, whatever) and wants to focus their product on that niche demographic, then they should let their ideological flag fly and be happy with the small tribe their products attract. Playing victim when the community notices your STW is just going to make you come across as entitled, making the whole situation worse.

Sexual Ideology in Games

This deserves special mention, especially in games marketed to children. I’m going to use Dragon Age: Veilguard as my example here, but there are many examples. I personally have no issues with men doing women, men doing men, women doing men, people doing multiple people, people really liking animals, etc as long as everything is consensual. But, unless it’s explained before I purchase a game, I don’t want to see that in a game. I’m on the asexuality spectrum (partly due to trauma) and I don’t want someone else’s sexuality forced on me without my consent.

I think most gamers feel the same way, even if they may have a hard time articulating it. Steam has literally thousands of games that are adult rated that cater to every fetish imaginable. You like demons? We got you covered. You like step siblings, no problem. You like tentacles, you are totally set. You want demonic step siblings with tentacles, it’s really totally available. But these products all make it clear what you are in for before purchase so you can decide for yourself if that’s what you consider entertaining.

There is all sorts of sexual content in Veilguard, some of it traditionally a bit racy or even forbidden. It also even has “top surgery character creation” options, so that you can role play a person that has scars from having removed your breasts as part of a gender transition surgery. This is immersion breaking in a game where magic just heals you or even resurrects you, and the modern tech path doesn’t exist. I like motorcycles. But I wouldn’t insist you give me a motorcycle in a high magic medieval fantasy game just because “that’s my identity”.

Don’t get me wrong, I might really enjoy playing a game that teaches me about other cultures that are outside of the monoculture I was born into. But that should be my choice. Electronic Arts can expect a lot of people to want to continue their Dragon Age experience because it’s a very popular IP. Just as the Marvel and Star Wars IPs used to be popular before they got ideological. But when you hijack a popular IP and use fan loyalty to force your ideology, especially if that’s a sexual ideology, you are going to upset a lot of people.

That upset isn’t “harassment”. It’s feedback. Just like your lack of sales is feedback.

Final Thoughts

It takes a great deal of entitlement and privilege to come to the conclusion that your ideology is superior to everyone else’s ideology. That’s not attractive. It’s not welcoming. Gamers play games to escape from all of the ideologies being pushed on them in the “real world”. The last thing they want is the real world being forced on them in their games.

Even AI knows what was going on 40 years ago.

Religious leaders were encouraging their followers to “purge” Dungeons and Dragons from their families and communities in the early 1980s. I was almost murdered several times before I even made it to my 18th birthday because I was an early adopter of D&D back in 1977. Once their religious leaders told them I was a demon worshipper, they just followed their ideology which has instructions for what to do in such situations.

I find it ironic that now we celebrate witches in Harry Potter, and Baldur’s Gate 3 was one of the most purchased and most awarded games of the last year. It’s a Dungeons and Dragons game. Now I’d be pretty shocked if someone started hunting down D&D players. 40 years is just a blink of the eye for ideology. I’m glad I survived to arrive on the right side of history, but now I fear that history is repeating itself.

I feel compelled to speak up. The world is simpler when it is filled with binaries: Man/Woman, Black/White, Rich/Poor, Good/Evil, Gay/Straight, Right/Wrong. Unfortunately for lazy thinkers, the world is a much more colorful and non binary place. But you can’t force people to see the world the way you see it. Living in a monoculture that tells you everything you do is right doesn’t allow you to bypass consent and choose for other people what they can do or think. Playing victim when people resist your programming is just pure entitlement.