I've written several games before, but most of them deliberately avoided dealing with people, because people can be complicated and I wasn't confident on how well I could write them. I decided to step out of my comfort zone with Creatures, and do a game that was entirely based around one of the more complicated interpersonal relationships: romance. Focusing on that human interaction ended up not only being really fun, but it offered me a great opportunity to make a game with a better focus on inclusion. I wanted to make sure that I had gameplay that was respectful to real-world diversity and showed a simple, better way to have inclusion in games, and dealt with discrimination seriously.
In some of the rotating breakfast
conversations, characters would bring up issues of race and gender,
because it's something that's important to people, and it should be
talked about. I made it clear that progress was still somewhat of a
struggle even in the future, because I didn't want to present a
magically post-racial, post-gender civilization. That's unrealistic
and erases the real struggles going on in the world right now.
And, despite the good intentions of the
designers themselves, I made sure to highlight the fact that their
game wasn't as inclusive as it could have been. You only get to
choose between two genders and three races, without even an option to
pick your age (you're young, of course). It completely steamrolls
over the actual diversity that does exist in the world. I
specifically kept the in-game game options sparse to contrasted with
the main game's character creation. It was designed to evoke a sense
of, "Why is this so restrictive?"
Because I definitely cared about
presenting inclusive options. For the main game, you get to choose
from several chunks of ages, from 3 preset genders with a write-in
option, and from different regional backgrounds (again, with write-in
options). It was quick, and easy, and much more representative of the
real diversity of humanity. I don't necessarily think I've figured
out the perfect system, but I think it's a big start in the right
direction, and it's a trend that I really hope and expect to see from
more games in the future. I'd love to hear thoughts about ways that
the presentation could be improved. (Note: it's possible I'll update
the game during the judging period, in which case parts of this
paragraph may become partially obsolete.)
I also felt it was pretty important to
be inclusive of different orientations, which I accommodated by
allowing the player a set of mixed genders of potential romance
partners, both in the main game and in the in-game game. I didn't
presume or ask a preference, I simply let players state their own
preferences by selecting a person (or selecting nobody at all). Of
course, while I think the perpetually-available-pan-sexual NPC works
well as a game mechanic, it's not necessarily the best way to portray
healthy relationships. And I probably could have included more gender
choices than just between male and females, but I think that's
something I can tackle next time.
I definitely made a point of allowing
for a perfectly valid and fulfilling friendship route, to be mindful
of asexual or non-romantic/professional preferences. I considered
allowing for a completely friendless route that could be picked by
players who really just did not feel like getting close to any of the
NPCs, but I had too much difficulty deciding what direction that
should go in: should it avoid the disaster totally, or should it
engage in the disaster, but more distantly? I even built in a
"nobody_affection" stat that I tracked, but I never ended
up implementing it. Ultimately, I couldn't get a solid feel for any
single narrative direction that felt right, so I dropped that idea. I
still feel like the friend route is perfectly valid as a professional
route, though.
I also thought about multi-person
relationships, and my brain nearly exploded at the programming
complexity that would have required (especially in ChoiceScript). I
think if I ever decided to include multiple people as romanceable, it
would have to be a set couple or a game with fewer romantic pursuits
overall. So while I had a few quick throwaways to liking multiple
people, it was never really considered as a valid option. Romancing
more than one person also wouldn't have really made for a good
parallel with romancing Elegy.
I will say that while I enjoyed
offering choices and discussing about inclusion issues within the
breakfast conversations, I think the game was a bit lacking in
directly dealing with any of the day-to-day issues that minorities
face. I'd like to deal more with the implications of different
identities in future games. I know I'm definitely excited to finally
get to examine and include more kinds of people in my games.
No comments:
Post a Comment