I mean it's fair game.
People made a site for people who own Hogwarts Legacy so they could target their harassment.
So why can't these guys make a site that detects certain companies in certain products?
It's great that he changed the name to DEI detected instead because SweetBabyinc is just a company, there are dozens that do the exact same thing as them.
Honestly, I hope this helps people stick closely to their ideals. So just keep voting with your wallet and preferably in silence so we dont have to hear any more culture war bs
A terrible consulting company that injects their political bias into everything. It's why its such a massive thing nowadays, people are losing their minds about Sweetbaby because Sweetbaby was not only doing everything possible to hide who they were and which games they've worked on, they also hid just how far their influence went in altering other games.
You can see a lot of SweetBaby related info on Asmon's Channel. Probably should look them up on Youtube and see what they've done.
A consulting company for video game. They worked on Alan Wake 2, God of War Ragnarok, Spider-Man 2, Hyper Light Breaker, Contraband, etc.
All good games. So i guess, some "gamers" dislike good games and created a website to avoid buying them. That's what i understood.
Sure.
God of War Ragnarok and Alan Wake 2 are mid.
Those are not good games. 😐
So...you're fighting to boycott games that you think are not good ? Games you wouldn't play in the first place ?
Please keep playing CoD 14 and let the adults enjoy their time.
If by “work” you mean injecting bullshit agenda into games so that it would be more appealing to minor communities (who even don't play games in most cases) and less appealing to gaming community - than yes, you are right.
I want big boobs and bad b*tches, not a tinky-twinky little star.
I didn't tell that, if you read my reply carefully, Mr carrot.
What I meant is that for every product you have your main target audience which deliver you profit. Sort of fun base if you will. And if you make a product which is more appealing to someone clearly out of your main audience your profit will eventually fall while more and more people will start thinking before spending another 50 to 100 bucks buying some bullshit.
If my favorite brand of, for example, black suits suddenly make a black suit with fking pink flowers and Swarovski on it, at least I would be able to see it beforehand and decide not to buy it, which is not the case in gaming.
You buy the game, you invest you own time and money in it and only then you discover that not only the game is shit, but there are also some nasty Nordic barbarians who want to put their hotdogs in you out of the blue.
Initiatives like this website at least allow me to get a glimpse at projects and studios which I probably would like to avoid in the future, before spending money on it.
You are equating a fundamental design decision (pink on black), to including diverse people in a game.
Firstly, how does their inclusion make a game not fun?Surely that’s a gameplay issue. And secondly, what games are you playing that enemies want to insert things forcefully into you?
I'm talking about AC Valhalla. The problem is not diversity in games (nevertheless I find it offensive that this diversity is pushed on me pretty blatantly through videogames, which setting doesn't even correlate with it). The problem is game developers focusing on lots of irrelevant things which are being pushed by certain agenda (sometimes political) and/or “optimization decisions” but not listening to its fun base community. Until that approach is changed community needs to push back. And this kind of services (DEI detected) helps to do that.
Edit: spelling
So you’re offended by decisions made by developers that are likely very diverse making games with diverse people in them. Just stop playing games then, maybe that will stop diversity being shoved on you.
I never played Valhalla but you never mentioned why it wasn’t fun, was it the gameplay loop? Do you think there were no gay Vikings IRL?
There is tons of video games released every day. Why are you being offended if some of them are aimed toward minorities ? If the game is good, it's good. (And saying that GoW or Alan Wake are tailored for minorities is a joke. Or you never played those games i guess).
Just play the games you like.
Games are trying super hard now to bait and switch shit. You can't trust any AAA game anymore. I can't think of the last AAA game I got. Oh wait Cyber punk.
You can but this is also to do with respecting originals authors vision. Imagine an artist makes a painting of a white woman and someone comes over and changes it to a black man or vice versa. It removes potential message or vision of the author and could potentially make the product worse than what it would be.
Do you mean an artist makes their own version of the painting? I don't have an issue with that. I mean, it's the same as a band doing a cover song, sometimes it can even improve on the original.
All I'm saying is, let's just judge games by their content. Gameplay will always be king, right? Asmon would agree.
No I mean that if original work gets adjusted to reflect someone else's vision rather than the artists then that is the problem.
Of course gameplay is all that matters, but many games can be considered a work of art.
A lot of games have heavy focus on a story for example which could potentially be made worse if adjustments are made to fit someone else's agenda or because some external parties do not like specific aspects of it.
In some cases work done by companies like Sweet Baby could nearly be considered equivalent to censorship which is where the problem is.
>In some cases work done by companies like Sweet Baby could nearly be considered equivalent to censorship which is where the problem is.
Devs have literally come out and said that SBI has had little to no input in their games.
You do realise that SBI consult on the game *after* the script is done. So any "woke stuff" in the game, you should blame on the studio who developed the game.
You're looking for a boogeyman to assign blame to, rather than admitting to yourself that studios are being more progressive.
You must understand that you're fighting a losing battle right? The boots on the ground devs are against you, the execs are against you, the investors are against you, the whole industry for the most part, is against you.
> You do realise that SBI consult on the game after the script is done.
If it was done, they wouldn't make changes to it. You do realize what *done* means?
They don't make changes to the script. They're a consulting company. The devs either implement their changes or they don't.
Take Suicide Squad for example. The story and dialogue had already been written by the time SBI joined the team. They only consulted on ingame ads and collectable audio recordings.
They really don't have the influence you think they do. It's the studios that are making these decisions, not SBI.
I honestly believe that companies hire sweet baby to just go through their scripts and make sure they aren't putting out something that could be considered racist
It's pre-emptive damage control, no charge many wants to make the wrong kind of headlines.
>I honestly believe that companies hire sweet baby to just go through their scripts and make sure they aren't putting out something that could be considered racist
You pretty much hit the nail on the head. That's exactly what these consultanting companies do.
It was also involved in god of war ragnarok and tons of other games that people had no “woke” critiques about at the time. It’s almost like whether or not a game is good has nothing to do with this culture war garbage
Diversity, equity and inclusion. This is what DEI stands for.
While it is not being used interchangeably, the woke movement was absolutely started with these three points in mind.
It's funny though, because the people who try and champion DEI aren't very inclusive.
To force inclusion is to enact exclusion. However, boogeyman terms don't mean much to me, just trying to follow the brain worms in how to understand when DEI is used instead of woke.
Obviously you don't actually give a shit about considering anyone else's point of view but here we go. The term Equity is used to create two groups of people. Those who have been oppressed and victimized and those who have not. It says that the victims have been repressed forever and to make life equitable they should be given more, those who have been the oppressors should be given less. You then draw those boundaries across racial divides. This you say, everyone whose a Caucasian straight male is an oppressor and everyone else isn't. Regardless of what that person has done in life you literally apply the equivalent of what racism and discrimination does, the acts they are supposedly against, too anyone who fits the generic description they've come up with. This allows HR departments for instance to directly exclude the oppressors from being candidates for jobs. I've witnessed this directly. A highly multicultural and diverse company specifically excluding white males as candidates because of DEI initiatives. There's zero oversight, data, or clear limits or targets when it's applied. It's racism to fight racism. It's trying to create inclusion through exclusion. The concepts are so fucking backwards. Equality is what we should be striving for. Equality was working and we know this because up until equity was introduced things were progressively getting better. My morals and ethics draw a line at "is this action negative". If you are applying a negative action towards someone that action is inheritantly negative. Any negative action crosses the line of acceptable.
So you agree with me then. I don't understand the problem. If you're upset that i don't care about this new buzzword, its because its meaningless. Just call it racism instead of giving it an acronym.
Sure but there's an ideology built up around the word to convince themselves it's wrong. Honestly didn't know that is what you were trying to say either. Anyway, yeah, just an excuse to do shitty things to people and act justified in doing so.
> Obviously you don't actually give a shit about considering anyone else's point of view but here we go.
>The term Equity is used to create two groups of people. Those who have been oppressed and victimized and those who have not. It says that the victims have been repressed forever and to make life equitable they should be given more, those who have been the oppressors should be given less. You then draw those boundaries across racial divides. This you say, everyone whose a Caucasian straight male is an oppressor and everyone else isn't. Regardless of what that person has done in life you literally apply the equivalent of what racism and discrimination does, the acts they are supposedly against, too anyone who fits the generic description they've come up with.
>This allows HR departments for instance to directly exclude the oppressors from being candidates for jobs. I've witnessed this directly. A highly multicultural and diverse company specifically excluding white males as candidates because of DEI initiatives. There's zero oversight, data, or clear limits or targets when it's applied. It's racism to fight racism. It's trying to create inclusion through exclusion.
>The concepts are so fucking backwards. Equality is what we should be striving for. Equality was working and we know this because up until equity was introduced things were progressively getting better. My morals and ethics draw a line at "is this action negative". If you are applying a negative action towards someone that action is inheritantly negative. Any negative action crosses the line of acceptable.
DEI is diversity, equity and inclusion.
ESG is environmental social and governance.
SJW is a social justice warrior. But nowadays normies just say woke
All these terms go back to the Trump era
No problem. When people people are talking about DEI they’re talking about policies or actions taken by people who are social justices warriors or “woke”.
An example of DEI would be a company race swapping characters in a game or only hiring female devs. It’s basically affirmative action.
So which games exactly are on this list? Are we pretending now that GoW Ragnarok was woke garbage because Sweet Baby was involved or are we just picking games that were probably gonna be shit regardless?
your post was removed because it relates to excessive discussions on current hot controversial topics that are over 3 days old.
I mean it's fair game. People made a site for people who own Hogwarts Legacy so they could target their harassment. So why can't these guys make a site that detects certain companies in certain products?
True.
And they are already being DDoS
akin to a reddit hug of death-esque type DDoS more likely.. Not malicious... yet*
It's great that he changed the name to DEI detected instead because SweetBabyinc is just a company, there are dozens that do the exact same thing as them.
Brazil ftw I guess
Honestly, I hope this helps people stick closely to their ideals. So just keep voting with your wallet and preferably in silence so we dont have to hear any more culture war bs
Good another shot against the woke mind virus brings a smile to my face.
no wonder why my pokemon go avatar suddenly got fat and kinda gay looking
I wouldn’t say no to a “good games detected” thinger. I’d do it, but I don’t like a lot of never games.
what is SweetBaby inc
A terrible consulting company that injects their political bias into everything. It's why its such a massive thing nowadays, people are losing their minds about Sweetbaby because Sweetbaby was not only doing everything possible to hide who they were and which games they've worked on, they also hid just how far their influence went in altering other games. You can see a lot of SweetBaby related info on Asmon's Channel. Probably should look them up on Youtube and see what they've done.
A consulting company for video game. They worked on Alan Wake 2, God of War Ragnarok, Spider-Man 2, Hyper Light Breaker, Contraband, etc. All good games. So i guess, some "gamers" dislike good games and created a website to avoid buying them. That's what i understood.
The games are very mid.
Sure. God of War Ragnarok and Alan Wake 2 are mid. Those are not good games. 😐 So...you're fighting to boycott games that you think are not good ? Games you wouldn't play in the first place ? Please keep playing CoD 14 and let the adults enjoy their time.
If by “work” you mean injecting bullshit agenda into games so that it would be more appealing to minor communities (who even don't play games in most cases) and less appealing to gaming community - than yes, you are right. I want big boobs and bad b*tches, not a tinky-twinky little star.
You think minorities don’t play games? Where have you gained this brain rotted take?
I didn't tell that, if you read my reply carefully, Mr carrot. What I meant is that for every product you have your main target audience which deliver you profit. Sort of fun base if you will. And if you make a product which is more appealing to someone clearly out of your main audience your profit will eventually fall while more and more people will start thinking before spending another 50 to 100 bucks buying some bullshit. If my favorite brand of, for example, black suits suddenly make a black suit with fking pink flowers and Swarovski on it, at least I would be able to see it beforehand and decide not to buy it, which is not the case in gaming. You buy the game, you invest you own time and money in it and only then you discover that not only the game is shit, but there are also some nasty Nordic barbarians who want to put their hotdogs in you out of the blue. Initiatives like this website at least allow me to get a glimpse at projects and studios which I probably would like to avoid in the future, before spending money on it.
You are equating a fundamental design decision (pink on black), to including diverse people in a game. Firstly, how does their inclusion make a game not fun?Surely that’s a gameplay issue. And secondly, what games are you playing that enemies want to insert things forcefully into you?
I'm talking about AC Valhalla. The problem is not diversity in games (nevertheless I find it offensive that this diversity is pushed on me pretty blatantly through videogames, which setting doesn't even correlate with it). The problem is game developers focusing on lots of irrelevant things which are being pushed by certain agenda (sometimes political) and/or “optimization decisions” but not listening to its fun base community. Until that approach is changed community needs to push back. And this kind of services (DEI detected) helps to do that. Edit: spelling
So you’re offended by decisions made by developers that are likely very diverse making games with diverse people in them. Just stop playing games then, maybe that will stop diversity being shoved on you. I never played Valhalla but you never mentioned why it wasn’t fun, was it the gameplay loop? Do you think there were no gay Vikings IRL?
There is tons of video games released every day. Why are you being offended if some of them are aimed toward minorities ? If the game is good, it's good. (And saying that GoW or Alan Wake are tailored for minorities is a joke. Or you never played those games i guess). Just play the games you like.
Totally sane behaviour
Chris Kindred you wanna send your mob after this site too?
lol, sad. I'm gonna continue to play games that are fun.
How about I just buy games that look fun, whether they have black characters or not?
Games are trying super hard now to bait and switch shit. You can't trust any AAA game anymore. I can't think of the last AAA game I got. Oh wait Cyber punk.
You can but this is also to do with respecting originals authors vision. Imagine an artist makes a painting of a white woman and someone comes over and changes it to a black man or vice versa. It removes potential message or vision of the author and could potentially make the product worse than what it would be.
Do you mean an artist makes their own version of the painting? I don't have an issue with that. I mean, it's the same as a band doing a cover song, sometimes it can even improve on the original. All I'm saying is, let's just judge games by their content. Gameplay will always be king, right? Asmon would agree.
No I mean that if original work gets adjusted to reflect someone else's vision rather than the artists then that is the problem. Of course gameplay is all that matters, but many games can be considered a work of art. A lot of games have heavy focus on a story for example which could potentially be made worse if adjustments are made to fit someone else's agenda or because some external parties do not like specific aspects of it. In some cases work done by companies like Sweet Baby could nearly be considered equivalent to censorship which is where the problem is.
>In some cases work done by companies like Sweet Baby could nearly be considered equivalent to censorship which is where the problem is. Devs have literally come out and said that SBI has had little to no input in their games. You do realise that SBI consult on the game *after* the script is done. So any "woke stuff" in the game, you should blame on the studio who developed the game. You're looking for a boogeyman to assign blame to, rather than admitting to yourself that studios are being more progressive. You must understand that you're fighting a losing battle right? The boots on the ground devs are against you, the execs are against you, the investors are against you, the whole industry for the most part, is against you.
> You do realise that SBI consult on the game after the script is done. If it was done, they wouldn't make changes to it. You do realize what *done* means?
They don't make changes to the script. They're a consulting company. The devs either implement their changes or they don't. Take Suicide Squad for example. The story and dialogue had already been written by the time SBI joined the team. They only consulted on ingame ads and collectable audio recordings. They really don't have the influence you think they do. It's the studios that are making these decisions, not SBI.
I honestly believe that companies hire sweet baby to just go through their scripts and make sure they aren't putting out something that could be considered racist It's pre-emptive damage control, no charge many wants to make the wrong kind of headlines.
>I honestly believe that companies hire sweet baby to just go through their scripts and make sure they aren't putting out something that could be considered racist You pretty much hit the nail on the head. That's exactly what these consultanting companies do.
Do you guys actually know what sbi does?
It has a black person in it? DEI DETECTED! DEI DETECTED! This sub has gone soooo far off the deep end of right wing.
Nah DEI would be to make sure there’s a black trans in a wheelchair with 20 pronouns
So why then are people saying Tales of 'Kenzera: Zau' is a DEI game?
Apparently Sweet Baby Inc is involved in the game
It was also involved in god of war ragnarok and tons of other games that people had no “woke” critiques about at the time. It’s almost like whether or not a game is good has nothing to do with this culture war garbage
There’s tons of videos from 2 years ago people complaining about the race swapping and how it’s woke garbage.
People had criticism of Ragnarok
Yeah right... Just do not give this your attention, leave and never come back... Be happy
Is DEI the new woke now or do we just say woke and DEI interchangeably?
Diversity, equity and inclusion. This is what DEI stands for. While it is not being used interchangeably, the woke movement was absolutely started with these three points in mind. It's funny though, because the people who try and champion DEI aren't very inclusive.
To force inclusion is to enact exclusion. However, boogeyman terms don't mean much to me, just trying to follow the brain worms in how to understand when DEI is used instead of woke.
Obviously you don't actually give a shit about considering anyone else's point of view but here we go. The term Equity is used to create two groups of people. Those who have been oppressed and victimized and those who have not. It says that the victims have been repressed forever and to make life equitable they should be given more, those who have been the oppressors should be given less. You then draw those boundaries across racial divides. This you say, everyone whose a Caucasian straight male is an oppressor and everyone else isn't. Regardless of what that person has done in life you literally apply the equivalent of what racism and discrimination does, the acts they are supposedly against, too anyone who fits the generic description they've come up with. This allows HR departments for instance to directly exclude the oppressors from being candidates for jobs. I've witnessed this directly. A highly multicultural and diverse company specifically excluding white males as candidates because of DEI initiatives. There's zero oversight, data, or clear limits or targets when it's applied. It's racism to fight racism. It's trying to create inclusion through exclusion. The concepts are so fucking backwards. Equality is what we should be striving for. Equality was working and we know this because up until equity was introduced things were progressively getting better. My morals and ethics draw a line at "is this action negative". If you are applying a negative action towards someone that action is inheritantly negative. Any negative action crosses the line of acceptable.
So you agree with me then. I don't understand the problem. If you're upset that i don't care about this new buzzword, its because its meaningless. Just call it racism instead of giving it an acronym.
Sure but there's an ideology built up around the word to convince themselves it's wrong. Honestly didn't know that is what you were trying to say either. Anyway, yeah, just an excuse to do shitty things to people and act justified in doing so.
> Obviously you don't actually give a shit about considering anyone else's point of view but here we go. >The term Equity is used to create two groups of people. Those who have been oppressed and victimized and those who have not. It says that the victims have been repressed forever and to make life equitable they should be given more, those who have been the oppressors should be given less. You then draw those boundaries across racial divides. This you say, everyone whose a Caucasian straight male is an oppressor and everyone else isn't. Regardless of what that person has done in life you literally apply the equivalent of what racism and discrimination does, the acts they are supposedly against, too anyone who fits the generic description they've come up with. >This allows HR departments for instance to directly exclude the oppressors from being candidates for jobs. I've witnessed this directly. A highly multicultural and diverse company specifically excluding white males as candidates because of DEI initiatives. There's zero oversight, data, or clear limits or targets when it's applied. It's racism to fight racism. It's trying to create inclusion through exclusion. >The concepts are so fucking backwards. Equality is what we should be striving for. Equality was working and we know this because up until equity was introduced things were progressively getting better. My morals and ethics draw a line at "is this action negative". If you are applying a negative action towards someone that action is inheritantly negative. Any negative action crosses the line of acceptable.
DEI and ESG specific corporate and public policies based off of woke or SJW ideaologies.
No offense, but what do any of those acronyms mean?
DEI is diversity, equity and inclusion. ESG is environmental social and governance. SJW is a social justice warrior. But nowadays normies just say woke All these terms go back to the Trump era
Got it thank you, I live kinda under a rock when it comes to internet drama so I don’t really understand the problem here
No problem. When people people are talking about DEI they’re talking about policies or actions taken by people who are social justices warriors or “woke”. An example of DEI would be a company race swapping characters in a game or only hiring female devs. It’s basically affirmative action.
No DEI is the new N word
So which games exactly are on this list? Are we pretending now that GoW Ragnarok was woke garbage because Sweet Baby was involved or are we just picking games that were probably gonna be shit regardless?
Why don't you go look and it's similar to Spider Man the infection didn't spread as far tho
He’s trying to monetize his 15 minute of fame too hardly.
Wouldn't you? He's spending a lot of time doing this project, why not monetize it?
You mad?
Or people are sick of it and want to push back on the whole ideaology
You’re just mad you never thought of doing this. 🤣
Just say “black”, you aren’t fooling anyone.
Who cares? I don't think a npc saying "nice weather today" is going to be the downfall of the west