SJWs Demand 'Deus Ex' Video Game Not Let Gamers Make 'Immoral' Decisions

Do Social Justice Warriors believe in … fun?

Many would say that they don’t. After all, they seem to focus on fun: pick something that people enjoy, and Social Justice Warriors are probably trying to impose their ideas on it.

We’ve seen them demand that fictional entertainment reflect their values, regardless of whether that makes any sense for the specific project. If you don’t like the finished, politically correct product? They scream about what a horrible person you are. (See: Ghostbusters. Or don’t!)

Now, they are lashing out at a video game that hasn’t even been released yet:

The upcoming video game Deus Ex: Mankind Divided has seen no end to controversy lately.

With release just a few weeks away, the perpetually offended raised issues over the game’s use of the term “mechanical apartheid,” and the horns of outrage have been sounded in light of the game’s supposed appropriation of Black Lives Matter within its themes.

More recently, self-described “pop culture critic” and Feminist Frequency producer Jonathan McIntosh took issue with the amount of freedom the upcoming game offers its players. It should be noted that player choice has long been a staple of the RPG genre, which allows players to decide the outcome of the story through their actions and deeds within the game.

This, apparently, is a problematic thing for anyone who insists video games should be pedagogical and instruct players with a certain set of views.

“Devs say it’s up to players to decide if internment camps are good or bad?! No. The question itself is political!” wrote McIntosh. “Game developers like to pretend their narratives, scenarios and mechanics are politically neutral but that’s never really the case.”

McIntosh further argued that players should have their choices restricted by developers and not be forced to make difficult decisions to alter or direct the game’s narrative.

“Sometimes when game designers set up ‘player choices’ the choice itself is immoral because it shouldn’t be up to the player to make it,” he wrote. “The point here is that the ‘player choice’ itself is an artificial construct that carries political messages no matter what players choose.”

For once, the SJWs are being consistent ideologically. (Unlike when they lash out about “violence” when a white male commits it, but ignore it when anyone else does.) However, the consistency lies in how the SJW wants to dictate morality to other people.

Your time on this Earth? They very much think it’s theirs to control. SJWs want your choices limited to a set of pre-approved selections, with no variance for individuality. And absolutely no room for debate, or for free inquiry.

Here, they look at a video game, and take issue with the fact that players can exercise their free will and make choices that aren’t pre-approved.

Can you imagine thinking like that? That merely being alive at the same time as someone else allows you to banish their idea or creation, which in this case is a video game?

Players can opt to be bad guys, even by the player’s own definition. Interestingly, there is some evidence that by doing so, players explore the darker side of human nature digitally rather than causing harm in real life.

That doesn’t matter, though. Anything the SJWs think is un-good must be banished for all time, while anything that is good should be mandatory.

And they wonder why no one listens to them. If only they knew we ignore them because we have no interest in limiting THEIR speech.