Readers dig into the finer points of Deus Ex’s “Augs Lives Matter” debate
Tact Matters
This week, Nick Wanserski delivered his review of Square Enix’s latest Deus Ex game, Mankind Divided, which attracted some controversy in the weeks leading up its launch thanks to marketing materials that used the phrase “Augs Lives Matters” in their depiction of a world where cybernetically enhanced humans are treated as an oppressed social group. That phrasing made it into, as Nick called it, the game’s muddied smorgasbord approach to social issues, and its inclusion turned out be a one small part of the game’s larger thematic fumbling. As Nick mentioned in his review, it’s not that Deus Ex is wrong to have attempted tackling such issues—we should encourage such exploration in games—it’s that it could have handled them with more care. Here’s Otakunomike’s take:
I understand the need to connect augs to any kind of minority group but there’s a lot of nuance being missed by Eidos with this. Augs willingly decided to have a procedure done to make them what they are, and there was a little issue of that incident that caused (in Eliza’s repeated parlance) the “biggest loss of life in history.” That’s documented evidence that some kind of concern needs to be directed toward them, as opposed to groups of people being oppressed for being born a different skin color and condemned with racist’s stats about violence that don’t show anything. Past simply co-opting the BLM name, you also have numerous parts of the game in train stations and stores where the city makes a distinction between “naturals” and “augs,” with the augs having far worse conditions. This is a game that’s not subtle about the point it’s trying to make, even as it utterly misunderstands it.
Several commenters weighed in on the trickiness of using science-fiction stories to explore these kinds of issues, including The Space Pope:
The big dilemma with using sci-fi metaphors for social issues, really, is that they can easily become redundant. The X-Men are a good example: At their creation, they were a perfect way to explore prejudice in a medium that was skittish (and under the Comics Code, discouraged) about addressing real-life injustice. The theme of “difference can be both a strength and a weakness” works great as a basis for action-packed superhero adventures and as a reference point for any marginalized individual group. But the Comics Code is gone now, and you can talk about racism or homophobia or whatnot all you want. How do you keep your metaphor relevant when it can walk alongside its literal counterpart?
It sounds like Deus Ex runs into the same problem. “Augs Lives Matters” would be more effective and less questionable if the story took place in a more dramatically different world from our own, where racism as we know it wasn’t also an issue. But instead we’re on our Earth, more or less, and not that far in the future, so the impression it leaves is of just pasting a made-up struggle over a real one, literally changing only one word. That’s not a clever metaphor or insightful twist, it’s just kind of lazy.
Merve thought there was even more to this issue, in Mankind Divided’s case:
I think the problem runs a little deeper than the misappropriation of slogans. (I haven’t yet completed the game, for what it’s worth.) The problem is that the game invites comparisons to real-world struggles rather than presenting its fiction as-is and letting players explore the issues that arise at their leisure, which is what previous games in the series did.
The only correct answer to “Is bigotry okay?” is “Absolutely not.” And so rather than providing a playground for players to explore their views on philosophical and socioeconomic issues, the game provides a simple message: “discrimination=bad.” The nuances, as Nick points out, are in the presentation of that message, not in the message itself.
Put another way by Merlin The Tuna, the possible issue in the case of “Augs Lives Matter” is the very direct real-world connection: