CCP Games and the World of Darkness franchise.

Jeanette Voerman from Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines. Screenshot taken from in-game.

Before you ask, no. They don’t sparkle.

It’s bad enough that CCP Games (The developers of EvE Online) cancelled their World of Darkness MMO earlier this year after almost a decade of development and PR silence, but now they go and squash a fan-made effort to reinvigorate a much beloved game because it’s ‘breaching’ the terms of their ownership of an IP they’ve been sitting on for ten years now.

But before that, some context is necessary. Back in 2004, a modern day take on the vampire focused roleplaying universe of The World of Darkness was brought to us by Troika in the form of the game ‘Vampire: The Masquerade Bloodlines’. As broken and half finished as the game was, it’s arguably considered one of the most compellingly dark, harrowing, atmospheric, funny and well written universes ever brought to the RPG circle.

A cult following followed this game to the point where the game today has been supported so heavily by the modding community, that the game has essentially been bug fixed, finished and beyond by fans of the franchise. Even today, 10 years after release, you can expect to see the game in the ‘most popular’ category of every Steam Sale that includes the game in its list of price cuts. You can read more about the history of Troika, Vampire and the game’s 10 years of continued bug fixing and mod support right here.

So, as you might expect: Fans wanted more. After the dissolve of Troika. CCP games ended up acquiring the rights to video game depictions of the World of Darkness universe. It was announced they were to develop a massively multiplayer online game. While many rolled their eyes at this, the game promised a plethora of innovative features such as beginning the game as a human (Which had its own viable meta-game) with the option (Or lack if you find yourself within the gaze of a so inclined vampire) of turning.

World of Darkness screenshot from http://bit.ly/126v4mB.

Players were to choose from a multitude of bloodlines of kindred, each with their own traits, advantages and disadvantages, and players were to be the sole guiding star for the game’s rules and structure. For example, an elected player would exist as the ‘prince’ of a city, and with the aid of their player controlled advisers, would have been able to permanently execute players they found to be breaching their way of running things. The game would have essentially been a sandbox for player driven political disputes, Second Life-esque social mechanics and support and a world completely open to a player’s desires and aims in what they would have wanted out of a truly open World of Darkness.

As the years went on, we heard remarkably little about the MMO’s development. Some tech demos here, a brief interview there, even some leaked screenshots from time to time. Then, word of completely scrapped alpha builds, and multiple reboots of the entire project began to surface. Lay-offs and employees being diverted from the project to EVE Online began to occur. At the beginning of 2014, CCP expressed desire at taking deep inspiration for sandbox games such as Day Z and Rust, and we all thought that the project was still moseying along at its own steady pace. We were patient. It was the most innovative sounding game I’d ever heard of, and I was willing to wait. I had faith. And boy, was I wrong to keep clinging to the hope that it’d ever see the dark of night.

CCP announced earlier this year, that the project had come to a close. We were sad. The WoD and Vampire community unanimously expressed disappointment at the long-time-coming close to such an ambitious project. While I was angry, having waited so long with so little for nothing, I understood. It was TOO ambitious. Especially for a developer with an already ambitious MMO to sustain of such a small user-base as EVE. This was okay. (A brief history of the World of Darkness MMO can be found on Wikipedia here, and a more detailed look at the game’s rocky development can be found here.)

What wasn’t and isn’t okay? Sitting on an IP with no expressed intention to do anything with it. CCP still own all rights to the World of Darkness, and there seems to be no sign of intention to develop or sell the rights to other studios. There is popular demand for this theoretical spiritual successor to Vampire: The Masquerade, and nothing seems to be happening. Disappointed, many turned to fan-led creations. There, just for a little while, there seemed to be a glimmer of hope: Project Vaulderie.

 

Project Vaulderie Screenshot from http://bit.ly/1vSnHgk

A small group of people announced an ambitious recreation of Vampire: The Masquerade within the Unity engine. Graphical enhancements, more content, polished game mechanics and even a multiplayer mode in the same vein as the WoD MMO – albeit at a much smaller scope. While the project went along slowly, it showed promise. It had an audience, it had an increasing amount of contributors, and it had momentum.

Then it happened. Last week, CCP shut the project down.

‘It appears that Project Vaulderie is now engaging in the unauthorized creation, use, and sale of products bearing the name of CCP’s registered intellectual property, Vampire: The Masquerade, without any license, authorization or permission of CCP.’

Notice the use of ‘sale of products’. A free, fan creation for the fans CCP refuses to cater to, despite sitting on the rights to is being shut down. DESPITE the project not breaching these terms anymore than the hundreds of Vampire mods that already exist, CCP used legal scare tactics to shut the project down despite having absolutely no right to.

I am so angry about this blatant abuse of copyright. There is no legal backbone to this claim, and I would urge the developers of the project to dispute these claims if I didn’t understand the fear behind just a few loosely connected individuals challenging a company as large as CCP. It’s absolutely sickening that CCP would scare a small group of loyal fans into forfeiting a fan creation that they had every right to create and share with the world just because they own a franchise they apparently don’t want the world to play anymore.

I expect more games from the World of Darkness universe will surface should they still be wanted, but I don’t expect them soon. Once more, we as fans are expected to wait patiently, oh so patiently… Oh well. I only hope that other developers, AAA, indie or otherwise see this void left in the market by CCP and act accordingly. Then again, the last time I hoped for anything, I was not rewarded.

If anything, this situation represents a growing issue with the state of copyright and copyright holders regarding intellectual and creative properties today. Tomorrow, I will be writing about a growing, more open alternative: Creative Commons.

Feminism in the game’s industry: Part 1

Rant time.

If you’ve been at all paying attention to some form of game’s journalism over the past few months, you may have heard a multitude of things regarding feminism in gaming. Articles ranging from how game developers need to make more female protagonists, to internet personalities being attacked and sent death threats over what many consider to be misandry (The male targeted equivalent of misogyny) and radical “feminazism”. While these people are wrong in the way they’re expressing their disdain for these feminist based views and are absolute scum for treating people this way under ANY circumstance; I see where they’re coming from.

This all started with a very influential internet personality: Anita Sarkeesian. She is well known for her videos dissecting the various sexist tropes towards women that exist within modern gaming. While she has maintained a large following for several years, the recent rise of awareness regarding feminism both in and out of gaming has garnered more attention than she would have liked. Sites dedicated to gaming news such as PCGamer, Kotaku and Destructoid have been posting articles quite firmly siding with her opinions for quite some time now, and while the journalistic gaming media are content in singing her praises, the majority of the non-journalistic gamers have responded VERY negatively to her views and the influence she will inevitably have on the gaming industry.

Why? You may be asking. The most prevalent criticism brought up by Sarkeesian and the media is the number of playable female protagonists in gaming and how they’re presented. Ubisoft holds much of the responsibility for this uproar having announced the lack of playable female characters in the upcoming Far Cry 4 and Assassins Creed: Unity. And while if main female characters were non-existent, or portrayed in a sexist manner, I would agree one hundred percent, but I ask you: How can you criticise a developer for choosing to create a story led by a male over a female any more than you can bash an author or director for doing the same? By telling developers that they’re in fact sexist for choosing male characters over female ones, you are not only trying to restrict a game studio’s creative freedom and integrity as well as their freedom of speech, but you are essentially turning the sexism cart right around on the male gender by saying that one gender is better than the other. That’s just wrong, no matter how you look at it.

“Bioshock Infinite” by jit is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

There are many female led games in the medium these days: Tomb Raider (2013), Bioshock Infinite, The Last of Us, Mirror’s Edge, Alice Madness Returns, Bayonetta, Beyond: Two Souls, and dozens more. These are all games that have come out in the past 10 years that have important, if not playable, characters that are portrayed as strong, independent women who within their respective games, overcome any male antagonists they encounter. With the exception of Bayonetta (A character who’s independence and strength is directly tied to her sexuality and her use of it to manipulate male characters within the game), only Beyond and Tomb Raider feature any form of sexual violence or abuse or in fact, anything of sexual nature, and these games are restricted to single scenes.

In fact, Tomb Raider’s implied rape scene ultimately ends in being a completely non-sexual murder scene that the player can respond to and prevent. Beyond’s attempted rape scene is a consequence of player choice that is ultimately portrayed realistically and gives the subject matter the respect it deserves, as it is shown to scar and damage the protagonist’s potential sexual advances with her partner later on in the game. Anita even states in her videos that sexual abuse of this nature is okay to use if it is used as a main theme or plot point to be explored by the main game if portrayed realistically and respectfully and not as a throw away prop – But more on that later.

It makes even less sense as to why developers are being labeled as sexist regarding their character choices when you take the settings and themes of these respective games into account. Assassins Creed: Unity is a game about assassins in the French Revolution. A time period where women still lacked the same basic human rights that men had, a time where women would be viewed as unworthy even by the self proclaimed “freedom fighters” because of the time period the game is trying to accurately replicate and represent. Far Cry 4 has less of an excuse, I admit, but the main themes of the franchise involve the use of male power fantasies and violence, their place and effect on mental health and morals in real life scenarios. And I firmly believe this is a kind of narrative device that could NOT be replicated with a female protagonist. If anything, Far Cry is sexist in capitalizing on a male stereotype that men desire to be violent, dominating and want nothing more than to hold power over others.

Ultimately, I disagree with the belief that there are “too many” male game characters. No developer should have to sacrifice their creative freedom and potentially compromise a game’s quality because they are bound by the need to be “diverse”. No. I believe that there is room in the industry for more powerful female characters in gaming. That’s for damn sure. Elizabeth from Bioshock Infinite is one of my favorite characters in all of gaming. A princess-trapped-in-a-tower stereotype rescued by a man, only to transcend her vulnerability to ultimately become the most powerful being in the universe. A clever, inspiring use of something that should have been nothing more than a sexist cliche that laid the foundation for an amazing character and narrative. MORE female characters does not, and should not mean “in place of male characters”. There is room in the industry for more female driven games without compromising or binning the iconic and amazing male led franchises we already have. While I see Sarkeesian’s and many others point in this matter, I do believe that they are failing to see the bigger picture regarding both gaming and feminism in general.

In my next article, I will continue to comment on Sarkeesian’s videos. I will be moving from the most popular view on gaming feminism she has put across to the most controversial: The use of women as background decoration in gaming, and why her video represents a growing trend of a very narrow minded form of women-only feminism.