But it is still based on ours, therefore can include elements and themes that are relevant to ours, no?
Like how one of the central themes of Harry Potter is that racism is bad. That’s beyond what you claim is the entire remit of the fantasy genre- does that mean Harry Potter is not fantasy?
No, it is your position. Just because you present it as if it were immutable law does not make it so.
Again: you are the one insisting there is one sole point to fantasy: how is that not infringing on creative liberty?
I think it’s possible to make this point without using an extremely narrow and exclusionary definition of what is, and is not, fantasy. That is my main concern with your argument.
Again, I will state this for the last time: YES, fantasy can include elements of reality (are you actually reading what I write or just arguing for the sake of arguing?). All of these elements are not what define the fantasy genre though. The synopsis for Harry Potter is not about a boy who fights racism; it’s about a boy wizard who fights a dark lord. You can remove the real-life elements and it’s still fantasy, but you can’t remove the imaginary elements and still call it fantasy. Therefore, what defines and distinguishes fantasy are ONLY the imaginary elements.
I’m simply copying and pasting the definition of fantasy, presented by Britannica. If you have a problem with how the genre is defined then take it up with them.
So, while we circle about arguing in futility over the definition of fantasy, let us return to the point of this thread: George R.R. Martin does not torture people. People who watched GoT on Sunday didn’t then go into work on Monday behaving like Ramsay Bolton. This, because people differentiate immorality in fiction from appropriateness in reality. Therefore, a creator should not feel pressured to remove controversial elements from their work.
I’m being told Outside’s graphics are amazing, there’s tons of content to do, but on the other hand balance is all over the place and the enforced hardcore mode + one character per account makes it even worse.
Nothing, actually. You just seemed confused regarding the definition of fantasy.
Indeed, like Trollbane, Garrosh, and Ymiron.
Right, so if the audience already knows what is appropriate and what is not, then why censor “problematic,” fictional content in the first place? What seems to be a cop out is the mentality that it’s an obligation of the developer to limit the audience’s exposure to slight profanity, racism, and sexualization, as part of some fool’s crusade to improve reality.
I look at it differently. I think writers can put whatever they want into their stories, so long as it’s not illegal (so basically child p@%^ and a “HERE’S WHY YOU SHOULD DO ILLEGAL THING RIGHT NOW” pamphlets). I also think people are free to criticize problematic elements in stories. Both of these are expressions of free speech.
I also think it’s okay to like things with problematic content. My favorite series The Demon Cycle has a hang up with female characters losing their virginity to to r@$^, and has a faction that is an obvious expy of sterotypical Muslim culture, whose leaders do some awful things that are never really addressed meaningfully by the narrative. But I still love it.
And in that context I think hiding behind “it’s not real!” is a cop out. If there are problematic elements in a story they’re there because the author put them there.
In the case of WoW iits clearly reacting to the lawsuit, i think some of the removals are silly but not much more emotion than that.
I also think your ops logic is using a flawed example.
I was simply refuting the notion that the purpose of fantasy is not “premised on creating a disparate world disconnected from our reality.” It’s not entirely disconnected, but the things that are disconnected are what actually distinguish the genre as fantasy.
Perhaps though, that statement about Harry Potter does have something to do with WoW, because none of the changes Blizzard has made are actually that relevant to the story… just like if you removed the racism from Harry Potter or the torture from GoT. It does make things more compelling though, to which (I think) we can agree.
I suppose then, the reason why all of this censorship bothers me is because I don’t think WoW should be made less compelling. The devs should be permitted full creative freedom to include stuff like Don Quixote references, sexualization and its associated innuendos, racism (particularly in a game based on faction wars between races), profanity, torture, war, etc. without fearing that the audience will in turn define Blizzard by those elements.
Individually, none of the stuff they’ve censored really matters, but cumulatively, it’s just going overboard. Every time I think they are done purging old content, I check the forums or wowhead and there’s something else that’s been removed, most of which, like you said are just silly.
It just makes me question the competency of the people making the game. I wonder when it’s going to stop, and will this lack of judgement (continue to) impact other facets of the game.
While it may just be a game, time is real, and I don’t want to sink more time into a failing product, if that’s indeed what this is.
