Grabbing the third rail –
Or: Why video games are not like fast food, politically speaking.
Despite some reporting, a close reading of Sweeney’s statements does not suggest a hardline stance on the role of politics in games. His take is actually a pretty nuanced attempt to balance a lot of competing factors of individual and collective self-expression.
In Epic’s role as the company behind the Epic Games Store, for instance, he’s adamant that “we as platforms should be neutral , “as he said at DICE. “When a company operates an ecosystem where users and creators can express themselves, they should be a neutral moderator,” he added on Twitter . “Else the potential for undue influence from within or without is far too high.”
That position echoes Valve’s
nearly two-year-old stance
for Steam game moderation, which is “to allow everything onto the Steam Store, except for things that we decide are illegal or straight-up trolling. ” And while it’s a fine position in principle, in practice it involves countless arguably political decisions. That’s especially true concerning games involving adult themes, extreme violence, or real-world situations, as we’ve pointed
Facebook have felt comfortable drawing. But the drawing of such a line suggests there are some types of expression that Epic is not comfortable with even considering as a platform. And maybe that line will move in the future, as Valve’s did in . The (Mockingbird) test
On the surface, this seems like a fine position to take — who (besides some shareholders) would want a marketing department to drive the creative direction of a game studio? But this kind of “art vs. marketing” separation might not be feasible in practice.
To take a completely theoretical example: say the (Fortnite) development team created a new map that included a slowly unfolding, island-wide crisis as a thinly veiled metaphor for global climate change. In a relatively clear political statement, fixing the in-game problem would require a critical mass of people deciding to stop fighting each other for their own benefit and working together to reverse the consequences of this crisis before it’s too late.Presumably, Sweeney would have no problem with such a statement if it came from the “heart of creatives” on the (Fortnite) team. But such a clear in-game statement in Epic’s largest title would implicitly tie the company as a whole to a position some players may see as politically controversial. Would the marketing department, or the company as a whole, be willing to “capitalize on division” in backing such a potentially divisive mode? Would the same apply if the issue was more controversial than climate change?
There’s an inherent conflict here between what an individual developer at Epic might want to say and what Epic, as a game development studio, might want to put its corporate name behind. That’s a conflict Sweeney seems to understand on some level.
“A company is a group of people who get together to accomplish a mission that is larger than what any one person can do , “Sweeney said at DICE. “And a company mission is a holy thing to it, right? Epic’s mission is to build great technology and great games. And we can count on every employee at Epic — we can even demand every employee at Epic unite behind that mission. other matter we have to respect their personal opinions. And they may differ from management’s or each other’s or whatever. “ “The world is really screwed up right now. Right now our political orientations determine which fast-food chicken restaurant you go to , “he said at DICE, in an obvious reference to Chik-Fil-A’s controversial corporate giving decisions
. “And that’s really dumb. There’s no reason to drag divisive topics like that into gaming at all.” It seems here that Sweeney is specifically focused on company executives using corporate donations or speech to represent the feelings of the entire workforce. “I just don’t feel it’s appropriate for one person, like a company CEO, to draw their company and its employees into their personal politics outside of the company mission,” he said in a tweet . “I think a company like that shouldn’t take a position on an issue like this, because it’s out of the scope of their mission, “he said in another tweet . “If one’s mission is to make great food, and s of employees have come together to support that, why drag them into an issue many disagree on? ” (Not a video game. (Read More) 
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings