How the “Woke” Critique has ruined game reviews.
Veilguard was seen as the next upcoming game in the series and the most anticipated one. Once news came out and content dropped, alongside genuine criticism, people began complaining that the game was “woke” for including diverse characters and offering options such as being a trans character.
A Metacritic reviewer, an example of these kinds of reviews, stated: “The story is disastrous and exists only to support agendas. The characters are very ugly and disgusting. The dialogues are horrible, useless and full of consciences. The puzzles in the game are a disaster.” This demonstrates a bias going into the game before the review, making it lacklustre to me.
This trend has been rising in recent years, with games such as the recent Assassin’s Creed being labelled as woke for having a black man as a main character. Critics overlooked the fact that there was also an option to choose a Japanese female character but ignored this to attack the game.
Ubisoft responded to the criticism about the inclusion of Yasuke, an African samurai, by emphasising historical accuracy: “Yasuke is based on a real historical figure, with his inclusion in Assassin’s Creed Shadows being a result of a meticulous creative process rather than an attempt at ‘wokeness’.”
The Woke Games List was a spreadsheet with a list of games that were considered “woke” by the creator of the document. It included games labelled as “woke” for having LGBT+ cosmetic items or pride flags. Most of it felt like nitpicking rather than actual criticism of these games.
The list mentioned a game originally supported by the right due to its connection to JK Rowling but later ended up on the list with the reason: “Contains overtly pro-LGBTQ+ messaging. Contains overtly pro-DEI messaging. 1800s Scotland somehow has diverse LGBTQ+ characters. Uses body type instead of biological sex.”
Another example is Forza Horizon 5, a racing game labelled as “woke” because “Allows players to choose pronouns like they/them”. With such simple reasons, it’s no surprise that so many games ended up on this list for ridiculous reasons, showing criticism done wrong.
Reviews should focus on how the game plays, but some evidently show that the reviewers have not actually played the game and instead wrote angry reviews to stir up anger. There is a way to disagree with a game by focusing more on the dialogue and gameplay elements.
The same goes for positive reviews. There used to be an overall consensus about how a game was perceived among the general public. Nowadays, with the popularity of review bombing, this is no longer the case, meaning people can no longer trust the integrity of even the most professional reviewers.
With Mass Effect 3, for example, there was a general look at the ending and its impact on the whole game, without discussing Shepard being a strong female character, which would have been more discussed if the game were released in modern times. It’s okay to be upset over a disappointing game, but anger has shrouded the art of reviews.
PC Gamer is a good example of a review that keeps in mind the history of the series while criticising the game: “Mass Effect 3 concluded in an overstuffed 15-minute climax that took some bold, perhaps reckless risks with its tone, cast, and story implications. Fans were apoplectic.” This breaks down the impacts of the ending and how Mass Effect 3 messed up in an unbiased manner, taking everything into account.
There were angry reviews before, but they would go in-depth into why a game is bad and shouldn’t be bought beyond the surface level, taking time to explain how those issues could be fixed or how the foundation of the game is broken. This gives an overall view to players to form their own opinions on whether to play it since both positive and negative reviews look deeper.
The word “woke”, used as criticism, is a simple yet vague way of saying why someone dislikes something, often meaning someone dislikes a game because of representation within a piece of media. This has made reviews more shallow and simplistic, giving a way out for people to avoid explaining why they dislike the game.
There needs to be a better balance in criticism. Even if the positives are small, there is always something good about even the worst media. I hope this is taken into account when people review games they dislike. Diversity in media can be discussed, but it shouldn’t encompass the whole review.
Moving forward, we need to examine how we feel about a game in a deeper manner and push for reviewers to play the games they review without positive or negative bias. With the rise of longer-form video essay-style reviews, I feel more positive about the future of reviewing, mainly in the video creation format.
