• 1 Post
  • 63 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 5th, 2023

help-circle












  • MolochAlter@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldSelective rage
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    The people who made the casting choice were told by Disney they couldn’t cast either, it was that or get replaced by someone else who would play ball.

    It’s ridiculous to expect them to remove themselves from a multimillion dollar project that would get done anyway with or without them.



  • MolochAlter@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldSelective rage
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    The only one of these that is remotely acceptable, to me, is Tilda Swindon, because they explicitly detached themselves from the character to avoid getting shat on by the CCP for casting a Tibetan and from Americans for casting a Chinese person.

    The others are all crap, IMO.

    Every time a character is <color>washed we lose the chance to be exposed to global actors that would fit their profile.


  • Because it’s pressvertising.

    Veilguard has had a year (at least) of relentless, shameless astroturfing, ever since BG3 got GOTY, because EA knows it’s not gonna be even close to competing with it and they (rightly) fear Veilguard will get shat on, especially since Bioware is on a 2 games abject failure streak with Andromeda and Anthem both failing horribly and Inquisition having at best a mixed reception with how buggy and repetitive it was at launch.


    As a rule of thumb: if an article comes out before a game’s actual release, it’s positive about an aspect the game or franchise is known to be lacking in, and it sounds like John Oliver’s parody of a corporate shill? It’s pressvertising.

    It’s access-for-coverage, a trading of favours that stays undisclosed because technically no money changed hands; however, in the past we’ve seen what happens to outlets that don’t kiss the ring and use the access to actually speak negatively of the product, or even neutrally, so we know there is an implicit (and explicit if you know the history of these dealings) pressure to be positive at any cost.


    So in short: it’s a bad article pretending to analyse the content they have early access to when really they’re just advertising the game uncritically. It’s literally just source-washed marketing material.