Stellaris Dev Diary #77 - Ethics Voice Packs

[Rafss]

Just leaving this by. Watch 00:12.

Go ahead, ask people if they want it for militaristic.

 

[MacKenzieSVFD]

Here's the thing: No matter The validity of such criticism, if we had picked a male voice, even one that sounded far 'crazier', we would have gotten at most 10-20% of the complaining we've gotten now. I make no judgment about any individual critique but this is an observable enough fact that we literally accounted for it in our planning. That's all.

I dont post, in fact had to go about actually activating my account just to make this post...

Here's the real thing.... your initial statement on this matter was *in fact* in error, as there was only one post I saw that had any complaint about the gender of the voice over. You instead however decided that the best course of action in responding to the critiques of the VO not fitting the role would be to make a blanket accusation of sexism towards your customer base. Ok, great, you are a wiz (no pun intended) at whatever you do involving video games... No sarcasm, I am taking it as fact that you know what you're talking about on the matter of producing video games, or coding them, or whatever it is you do...

Let me in turn advise you on what I'm a wiz at... business. You. Do. Not. Insult. Your. Customers.

You do not insult them to their faces, you do not hit them with veiled insults. You do not disparage them, you do not mock or belittle them. You do not make them the butt of a joke at their expense, even if it's in good faith and humor. You do not do these things because if you want to keep making money with your business, you need your customers to provide the money part of that "making money" equation. You will find that if you habitually disparage your customers, you will soon have few, if any customers.

You also do not do these things because that is not what decent people do. And that should be a consideration that goes above being good to just your customers.

Ok, that being said.... You leveled a blanket accusation of sexism towards your audience. Ok, you made a mistake, it happens... But you doubled down, then tripled down on your error rather than apologizing for speaking poorly of the people who buy your products.

You do *NOT* know how much "complaining" you would have gotten had the VO talent had dangly bits instead of inny bits. Sorry, you do not have the ability to see the future like that. Nobody does. And again, rather than accepting the critique of the VO not matching the ethos the VO was assigned, you insult your customers again by belittling their critiques as complaints.

And yes, you made a very clear judgement on the character of your customer base. You made a nasty one at that. That you also claim that you accounted for the ability to insult your customers is just.... well, why do you still have a job levels of amazing. You leveled a very serious question of character upon your customer base, and you've made it clear that you actually do hold a VERY low opinion of them.

The vast, overwhelming, 99% unanimous factual content in this thread is critique on the flavor of the VO matching the ethics it was assigned. It had nothing to do with the quality of the VO itself, which does sound like very professional work, just simply more fitting for a different ethic/civic such as fanatical purifiers. It had nothing to do with the sex of the VO talent, and numerous posters have pointed out examples from other games with "strong female characters" who fit the role far more suitably. Nobody is saying the VO doesn't fit because it's a woman. People even pointed out a more suitable VO for the military ethic from not only your own studio, but VO already associated with THIS very product. It was female, it was strong and military minded, the quality of the acting was excellent...

And that you then turn to say "well you're all just sexist, we counted on that"... Why do you still have a job interacting with the customers when you demonstrate an almost obsessive desire to insult them in every other post?

And finally... a question related to the 10-20% remark....

What's 10% of 1 post?

I don't read reddit, so I cannot account for whatever content is there, but I can account for the content on this very thread.... one post complaining about the VO being female that I found, and judging by another poster's statements, he found the same results. So if the VO was male, you state quite clearly that the "complaints" would have been 10-20% of what you have now in reality about the female VO... Is 10% of one post going by word count? If so, the post in question had under 100 words, so.... letter count maybe? Which are the offending letters? Are they contained within the same sentence, the same clause, the same word?

Will you continue to double down, or will you do the right thing and apologize to your customers for making unsupported and unsubstantiated accusations on the quality of their character? This is actually the most important one. It is only fair to your customer base that they know up front if they are going to receive a good customer experience, or if they will have to be willing to endure slander as part of the price of your product.

 

[Ur-Quan Lord 13]

I don't think he's saying that 80-90% are actively misogynistic. I think it's more that the culture we live in doesn't have many examples of that type of female character. Picture the blood knight sterotype. Whether it's in sci-fi or fantasy it's almost certainly going to be a male character, because it's associated with traditionally male stereotypes. The angry, zealous warrior is a male thing and has been since the Templars.

True, and like I said if he'd used 50% or something I probably could have said "well yeah maybe".

But, for many years, in my gaming experience, zealous female warrior has been an option. Like I said, I played a number of RPGs where I got to choose my VO. If they had "bloodthirsty male" as an option, they had "bloodthirsty female" too. And afaik, no one complained over having that option. It probably wasn't selected as often, sure. The only difference is, they weren't saying "bloodthirst is how militarists sound".

I choose to believe that most of the complainers here care about that, rather than the archetype problems. Maybe I'm too much of an optimist, but it's what I believe.

 

[Mr.Rictus]

Honestly, I think the complaints aren't particularly valid, for the simple reason we haven't heard the others yet. I do think that this is over the top for most militaristic cultures (though would fit some with warrior culture for instance), however the "orderly, disciplined" voiceline that most propose instead? I'm fairly certain it would be almost exactly like the authoritarian voice. So ultimately, I'm sure most who like to think of a structured military will play authoritarian, and those bloodthirsty conquerors/ fanatic purifiers/ unhinged destroyers will pick the military one.

Just to hammer the point home, military and xenophobe are the only ethics where you can ham it up with the implied violence, and clearly the xenophobe voiceline is more "Imperium of Man" style, leaving military to pick up the slack in that department. As previously stated, you don't HAVE to play the voiceline associated with your main ethic, you can play around with it.

 

[Darkspysrival]

In an ideal world, they would have cast TC Carson (Kratos) for militarist and Phil LaMarr (Samurai Jack) for pacifist.

 

[Serenity84]

Go ahead, ask people if they want it for militaristic.

The line works in the context of the movie. It wouldn't necessarily work somewhere else. So it depends on the situation.

The difference to the Stellaris voiceover though is that it's shouted, but not growled. For me it's the growling that ruins it.

 

[SolSys]

You know, the annoying thing is, this post is insightful and I could have agreed with it. If not for that ridiculous 10-20% number.

... It had nothing to do with the quality of the VO itself, which does sound like very professional work, just simply more fitting for a different ethic/civic such as fanatical purifiers ...

After reading about the existence of an even more "crazier" script I have come to the conclusion that she did not - as I assumed previously - over-act.
It is more likely that she was directed to perform as she ended up doing and the fault, at large, falls on the bad script.

 

[Summin Cool]

In an ideal world, they would have cast TC Carson (Kratos) for militarist and Phil LaMarr (Samurai Jack) for pacifist.

I disagree with that


There are also going to be four avatar films in total.
What.

 

[Darkspysrival]

I disagree with that
View attachment 284502

There are also going to be four avatar films in total.
What.

You know what, I change my mind. THAT GUY would be a great militarist. Or the General guy from Battle for Terra. I still stand by Pacifist Samurai Jack, though. And even though it would put Paradox in deep legal trouble with EA, George Takei as Spiritualist.

 

[MacKenzieSVFD]

I mean, I guess if everyone wants to interpret that as him calling them sexists individually, no one can stop them. I certainly didn't take it as an insult to myself, but then I'm just one person, not a demographic.

Or is the community on this forum really so full of themselves that they think that as a whole and individually on a collective level, we are all of us flawless, perfect, and beyond reproach in any manner? That any criticism to the collective environment that this forum is a subset of is a direct attack on the individual that dares call themselves a member of it in any capacity?

So you are saying it's OK to level unfounded blanket insults on demographics? Are you honestly of the opinion that it would be OK to say, for example, "black people are bad-thing-X" as long as you don't name an individual? Wouldn't such a statement be, I dunno.... kinda racist?

 

[Dalinski]

Is there the Wilhelm death scream in there some where?

 

[Summin Cool]

So you are saying it's OK to level unfounded blanket insults on demographics? Are you honestly of the opinion that it would be OK to say, for example, "black people are bad-thing-X" as long as you don't name an individual? Wouldn't such a statement be, I dunno.... kinda racist?

Not at all, It's more like insulting x because y despite y being completely untrue. Racism is completely dependent on context, and it doesn't enter the scope of this mess.

Whats even more insulting is that Wiz didn't actually listen to any of the arguments, he just went off on his own narrative.

 

[Insane Commander]

I have nothing against the Klingons, but if I play as a militarist empire I don't want to be Klingons. I'd choose a more disciplined behavior. I prefer to hear more before judging the VOs in the DLC, but if the authoritarian one is cool, I'll have no problem using it for another ethos.

As for it being a female voice, I actually would find it better. Because of Star Trek: The Next Generation I ended up with the idea that a ship computer or an AI is female.

 

[Draconaes]

So you are saying it's OK to level unfounded blanket insults on demographics? Are you honestly of the opinion that it would be OK to say, for example, "black people are bad-thing-X" as long as you don't name an individual? Wouldn't such a statement be, I dunno.... kinda racist?

Alright, I see how I could be read that way. To be clear, I disagree that your example is innocuous. I don't really have the time or inclination to elaborate my point here. Honestly a lot of conversations on this kind of topic seem to be people talking past each other, and I'm certainly not innocent there in general.

My point was more about communities than demographics, which I feel is different enough that your analogy doesn't hold perfectly, but maybe I'm wrong. It's certainly not something I've put great effort into formalizing my thoughts on yet.

I'll end my comment off here with a restated expression of hopeful optimism for the voice packs.

 

[SolSys]

... soliloquy ...

Reminded that this was a word - it's been long since lit classes at school.
Now just to find how to elegantly slip it into everyday conversation

 

[Scorchlite]

I understand entirely where Wiz is coming from.

I also agree that when I first though of militarist, before hearing anything, i thought of a cold professionalism. However, both that and the Klingon style are equally valid for militaristic ethics depending on your empire. Furthermore, no other ethic could really justify such an aggressive style. I expect authoritarian to fulfill the cold flavour I initially thought of and think having both in the game - so that fanatic purifiers have a representation - is more desirable over several variants of 'cold and professional'. I actually really like all 3 and find the 'she is frothing at the mouth' comments to be gross hyperbole. It is slightly Klingony yes, but far from demented.

As for the sexism issue, I do understand the argument that people might be unconsciously reacting to the voice as being female without even realising it. You can argue all you want for your own case, but the fact remains everyone reacts instinctively to different things without being aware of it based on upbringing and past experiences... creating unconscious expectations. I've read some fascinating studies about how the brain - within just fragments of a second - reacts negatively to pictures of strangers from different racial groups. This is just how the human brain has evolved and is to do with a sort of tribal 'group' mentality. It goes on to show how this initial response can be easily overridden by higher brain functions, and more constant exposure to difference etcetc. The study went into A LOT more detail than this and I am not doing it justice, but the point remains; our brain reacts without us realising it and colours our perceptions. From what I understand, Wiz is arguing that such a colouring of perceptions is happening in some cases and people are not aware of it. Whether this is true or not I am not going to and can not comment. The argument, however, makes sense.

Edit: And yes, pretty much everyone is going to have expectations and preconceptions hidden away based on gender.

 

[HAL.9000.1]

I have nothing against the Klingons, but if I play as a militarist empire I don't want to be Klingons. I'd choose a more disciplined behavior. I prefer to hear more before judging the VOs in the DLC, but if the authoritarian one is cool, I'll have no problem using it for another ethos.

As for it being a female voice, I actually would find it better. Because of Star Trek: The Next Generation I ended up with the idea that a ship computer or an AI is female.

Well, you are thinking of the Klingons from ST:TNG and the movies, who in reality probably never would have gotten off their planet without exterminating themselves in some idiotic blood feud. But remember the Klingons from ST:TOS? Those Klingons might have actually made it into space.

 

[MacKenzieSVFD]

After reading about the existence of an even more "crazier" script I have come to the conclusion that she did not - as I assumed previously - over-act.
It is more likely that she was directed to perform as she ended up doing and the fault, at large, falls on the bad script.

I didn't think it even sounded that "crazy". Overly dramatic at best would be my say on it.

The best way to clear up the VO sets themselves would be to do what they did with the rooms setup. Let the player choose. That... and have both male and female voice sets....

Because it would be VERY immersion-breaking if when a female ruler is voiced by a male, and a male by a female. I always took the Tutorial AI-bot as being a workaround for that.... instead of having to voice-act male and female versions of every line (or even every species, unless all aliens , they had a generic helper to do the voice work which worked regardless of the ruler's gender, or even species

Alright, I see how I could be read that way. To be clear, I disagree that your example is innocuous. I don't really have the time or inclination to elaborate my point here. Honestly a lot of conversations on this kind of topic seem to be people talking past each other, and I'm certainly not innocent there in general.

My point was more about communities than demographics, which I feel is different enough that your analogy doesn't hold perfectly, but maybe I'm wrong. It's certainly not something I've put great effort into formalizing my thoughts on yet.

I'll end my comment off here with a restated expression of hopeful optimism for the voice packs.

Communities can be demographics as well. Your statement makes no sense until you explain what definition of 'demographics' you are using.

 

[SolSys]

The best way to clear up the VO sets themselves would be to do what they did with the rooms setup. Let the player choose. That... and have both male and female voice sets....

According to the devs answers you can.

 

[Insane Commander]

Well, you are thinking of the Klingons from ST:TNG and the movies, who in reality probably never would have gotten off their planet without exterminating themselves in some idiotic blood feud. But remember the Klingons from ST:TOS? Those Klingons might have actually made it into space.

That is correct. I actually watched some of the movies first, then ST:TNG and the original series later. My first impression was not the one in TOS.