Why Diversity is Inevitable and What It Means for the Industry

Evolution and reinterpretation have always been the key factors standing as the foundation that helped the gaming industry thrive, from new mechanics to new customization for your characters. However, some changes might not be desired and are sparking more controversy than others. Avowed, Obsidian’s newest role-playing game (RPG), promises engaging combat, an expansive fantasy world and a deep story. What really pushes this game out of the ordinary, however, is that this game gives  an exceptional level of freedom to the player. On the surface, it appears to be a highly anticipated inclusion in the RPG genre. However for some, there is a perceived issue with one of its core additions that makes the game unique; the freedom of choice, leading it to be seen as “too woke” by the individuals in the gaming industry. With an increasing regularity,new games are labeled as part of a so-called “woke agenda”. This time, the debate has been centered around Avowed, with some players questioning whether the game is genuinely embracing modern storytelling and mechanics or is actually forcefully pushing the diversity to meet some quotas. I believe this shows us the way to a broader and more important question in the gaming community: Why does this debate continue to surface? And more importantly, is diversity in gaming truly something that we should be concerned with, or is it simply a reflection of the natural course of the industry? I believe that this controversy and drama that follows are not solely about Avowed, and instead, they are running deeper and being suggestive of a larger shift in the gaming culture that we know. It highlights the tension between the traditional players who believe the freedom of your choices might overwrite the quality of the story, and a new category of players who believe diversity is what’s saving the newer  games. It seems to me that a new chapter is beginning in the gaming industry, but not one that everyone is prepared to engage with.

The Golden age of gaming

For decades, gaming has been a reflection of a singular vision. The heroes that we played in most of those titles were white, male,and heterosexual, mirroring the perceived audience that the gaming companies catered to. The Doomguy and Masterchief are just some popular examples of stoic and powerful individuals that exhibit unchallenged dominance in the story, something that made them fit to be main characters that you play as. In the stories they tell, the characters delve into conquest, war, power, and become heroes in the specific setting they appear in, rarely diverging into narratives that question real problems that people can relate to such as identity, society,or inclusivity. Even  (RPGs), the genre that is most known for player choices, leaned towards a default standard that did not offer  the bare minimum of freedom to the player. Many of these games have allowed character customization, but few storylines if none revolved around those character choices made by the player. One example of such a game that tried to enrich its world through a more diverse narrative was Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind. It created a diverging and politically rich world that was acclaimed at the time by its players for trying something new, yet it was still rooted in the fundamental Eurocentric fantasy traditions. I believe there was no pressure to include more diverse representation because there was no demand, or at least if it existed it was shoved aside as being something niche and not appealing to the broader audience. Yet, the gaming industry and its community in its earlier years was, in some ways, more inclusive than it’s often remembered by many in the present. Early Massive Multiplayer Online games  (MMOs) and table-top inspired RPGs allowed players to experiment with the identity of their character and what their place is in this virtual world, long before conversations about representations entered the mainstream gaming discourse. The difference that we see between the past, which was considered the golden age of gaming and the present times, came from the expectations. In the past, inclusion was indeed present, in one form or another, albeit more rarely than it is now. However it was not analyzed, debated, or hated to the degree that it is today. I think that back then it was accepted as part of the background, either as an aesthetic feature or as a new side addition to enhance the games rather than a statement. The golden age of gaming may have felt simpler, but that simplicity was a product of less visibility, diversity being considered as nothing more than a niche tool. The industry did not resist inclusivity- it simply did not acknowledge its importance. Nevertheless, the gaming industry never stopped reinventing itself, and bit by bit the focus slowly shifted to diversity as the point of focus, but that only led to the community being more hateful towards it. So the question we should ask ourselves is: What changed?

The Backlash Against Inclusion

While not pinpointed to a singular point of origin, what changed was the category of individuals playing and designing the games but also the politics and the times we are living in. As the industry shifted towards a broader representation, some players got fed up with the new current existence  of “woke politics” as they call it and now they have responded with resistance. Games that embraced diversity were met with various accusations of being political or pushing for a specific agenda, even though, since the birth of gaming, storytelling has always been influenced by the present social and cultural themes surrounding us. It seems that, while some players saw the growing inclusivity as a necessary step forward and rejoiced in the freedom of choices and diversity they were given to work with, others, fueled perhaps by nostalgia, viewed it as an unwelcome departure from what they believed to be the roots of all modern games. Nowadays the criticism has often framed diversity as an artificially created abomination that has intruded upon the “sacred grounds”, rather than a natural evolution of the industry.  This criticism is fueled by the argument that “politics should stay out of games”, which seems to ignore the fact that fantasy and science fiction media have always explored social issues as a reflection of reality. Popular and widely acclaimed games like The Witcher, Baldur’s Gate, and The Elder Scrolls built entire worlds on these themes. Nonetheless, there is also a side of this argument that believes that sometimes new titles add what they consider to be the “woke agenda” without it having any new addition to the story, existing just as a pointless empty shell that does no justice to the people it was supposed to represent. Therefore I believe that the backlash is not merely against politics in gaming, but also against a changing definition of whose stories are told and of how those new narratives are handled in virtual space.

The Avowed Debate

Avowed has become a focal point in this ongoing cultural shift. Set in the world of Pillars of Eternity, the game promises deep RPG mechanics and a richly developed setting. However, much of the discussion surrounding the game has focused not on its gameplay or world-building, but on whether its approach to diversity is “forced”. One of the most discussed features is the fact that it allows its players to even choose the pronouns they identify with when they are creating who they want be in this new game. This is a move that, while in line with greater character customization, drew criticism from those who felt it was an unnecessary inclusion. The belief that diversity is an obstacle to immersion overlooks how varied perspectives have historically enhanced the medium. In Avowed, diverse characters and cultures exist as part of the world’s fabric, much like in any well-developed fantasy setting. The controversy surrounding Avowed mirrors past debates over games like The Last of Us Part II, Baldur’s Gate 3, and Cyberpunk 2077. Each faced criticism for centering narratives around diverse characters, yet all were critically acclaimed and commercially successful. The pushback against Avowed is not about the game itself but about a broader discomfort with an industry that is no longer catering solely to its traditional audience. Adding fuel to the fire, recent online debates have extended beyond the gaming industry itself. Figures like Elon Musk, a vocal critic of “woke culture,” have actively engaged in discussions about entertainment and gaming, often amplifying backlash against diversity initiatives. Musk’s online influence has made him a prominent voice in these conversations, reinforcing skepticism toward modern gaming trends among his millions of followers. This  seems to have made it so that Avowed has been struggling to make back its profits as most players refuse to buy it, considering that the company has yet again decided to push an agenda rather than focus on the gameplay and story of the title.

The Future of Gaming Belongs to Everyone

The gaming industry is not erasing the past. Rather, it is expanding beyond it as it has always done previously. For those who crave traditional fantasy, the classics remain there for them to be rediscovered. But for those who seek new stories and perspectives, and a world that not only mirrors what reality is but also goes beyond it by allowing the players endless possibilities when customizing who they want to be, games like Avowed represent not a threat, but a promise. A promise that gaming belongs to everyone. A promise that the future is vast and bright, and that it isn’t  shackled down by its own past.