If there is an issue that causes sparks to fly it's racism. To be tarred with the brush of racism is one of the worst things possible, short of pedophilia or kind of enjoying Underworld on the PS2. We view it as one of the greatest of possible evils. It might be fair to say that Hitler's Holocaust appalls us as much for its (largely) racial motivations as for the vast quantities of dead. If the same numbers of people had been chosen at random we might have a different view, or at least a lower standard for the horror.

It's not hard to see racism in past decades. Have you seen The Goodies lately? It's quite startlingly racist. We look to our past and see the racism inherent in everything from colloquialisms to immigration policies, though in revered figures is harder to perceive. That Abraham Lincoln sought to "free the slaves" is well known, but early on he actually supported shipping them off to Central America once freed, and was more interested in the effect of slavery on l...

If there is an issue that causes sparks to fly it's racism. To be tarred with the brush of racism is one of the worst things possible, short of pedophilia or kind of enjoying Underworld on the PS2. We view it as one of the greatest of possible evils. It might be fair to say that Hitler's Holocaust appalls us as much for its (largely) racial motivations as for the vast quantities of dead. If the same numbers of people had been chosen at random we might have a different view, or at least a lower standard for the horror.

It's not hard to see racism in past decades. Have you seen The Goodies lately? It's quite startlingly racist. We look to our past and see the racism inherent in everything from colloquialisms to immigration policies, though in revered figures is harder to perceive. That Abraham Lincoln sought to "free the slaves" is well known, but early on he actually supported shipping them off to Central America once freed, and was more interested in the effect of slavery on labour forces than their welfare. He also said "he [the black man] is not my equal in many respects, certainly not in color - perhaps not in intellectual and moral endowments".

If you want a nicely revered and revised figure who was racist by any standard, take a second look at Gandhi. For all his vaunted pacifism he started out as a soldier killing "kaffirs" (a term for Black Africans that rates on the happy-meter right up near "nigger") and his love of black Africans never grew beyond seeing them as vermin. In fact, all his "good works" were about helping not just Indians, but the upper caste of India only, combining racism and elitism in a way that makes his veneration harder to swallow still.

Getting back onto Hard Drinkin' Lincoln, though, it's not fair to consider him racist, as the times they are a-changing. Unto every generation less racism is born, but the standards of today should never be applied to the people of yesterday. By his own time's standards, Lincoln was a progressive, respected liberal.

So where does this relate to gaming? It's probably also fair to say that racism isn't often an issue in video games, when compared to issues such as swearing and violence. The gamer of today is educated, intelligent, and (in general) relatively young. We're dedicated consumers of a media forged largely in Japan, and often fans of other Asian media such as Anime and Hong Kong Cinema. We are worldly and broadly influenced. We consider ourselves colour blind. I'm actually colour blind. I don't mean in a moral sense. I mean I don't see red and green properly. That's actually pretty irrelevant, but I thought I'd bring it up.

Anyway, it's perhaps because of this (our worldliness, not my colour deficiency) that we take so much offense to any suggestion of racism on our part. We're quick to distance ourselves from even a perception of racism, to the degree that any reference of race has to be prefaced with warnings. A friend of mine while walking in town recently said "I don't mean to sound racist, but there are a lot of Asians around here." This fascinated me. It was a purely empirical observation, devoid of any form of judgment, malice, or prejudice. It was also, in fact, entirely true. Why the need to apologise for it?

Racism is a hard thing to define and quantify. There are two parts to it. There's the "text" itself, the movie, the game, the image, etc. Then there's the interpretation of that media. This is where the problem lies. Offense can be taken through the best intentions, and often through ignorance. A number of racial controversies have occurred recently, and have caused a degree of kerfluffle.

The release of the white PSP in Europe prompted Sony to create some very badly received billboards. Featuring a sexually provocative (maybe I'm just seeing it everywhere) face off between a black model and a white model, the ads were immediately leapt upon by the world (especially the USA) as racist. It's possible that no racism was intended, and the advertising agency responsible simply liked the contrast of black and white, in keeping with the products. Indeed, that was the response of Sony. But the perception of it is what really matters, and they were not perceived well.

Another example was LocoRoco, about which a single blogger began worldwide questions about its racism. The perception of that writer was that the Moja baddies were essentially modern day black-face, a negro mocking slapstick farce in which white people don black face paint and parody blacks. It was popular many years ago and thankfully long gone. Until LocoRoco, of course. The charge was that by making the characters dark, with big white eyes and a sort of "ooga booga" vocalization the characters represented a sort of sub-conscious perception of negro-as-enemy.

The most recent and relevant controversy was also prompted by a blogger. The game in question was the much anticipated Resident Evil 5. The trailer shown at E3 generated buzz from gamers, as expected, but also from some unlikely corners. Kym Platt from Women's Blog "Black Looks" made a powder keg commentary on the trailer and the game in general, basically pointing it out as a game where the white man kills the black man for fun and profit.

Naturally the gaming blogs jumped on this, and the commenters commented. As they do. The most ubiquitous comments were pretty much to be expected, and not without merit. The previous games have been entirely killing white people, with the exception of RE4, which managed Hispanic slaughter with nary a mention. The second point that was made ad-nauseum was that the targets are not black Africans, but KILLER ZOMBIES.

Another point largely overlooked, but pretty relevant, is the revelation that the game is believed to be set not in Africa as believed, but in Haiti.

Follow up from the writer has been unfortunate in the extreme. Drawing from the worst of the worst of the commentary, the writer has stated that response have been incredibly racist, showing how right she was, and how much this issue needs to be brought into the open to show just how racist and violent games and gamer are.

"Never have I been so harassed and insulted, and all because I questioned the imagery in this game… The response has been horrifying… I am shocked that in the same breath some of these folks denied that Resident Evil 5 displayed racist/anti-Black imagery; they called me things like 'nigger', 'bitch', and 'whore'.

...The gamers would like to intimidate me and silence me, but that's not going to happen. This vitriol has done nothing but embolden me and my political convictions."

I don't think it needs to be stated (but I will anyway) how far the average gamer will consider themselves distanced from those whose racist vitriol was received by this writer. That these bastards can be taken as somehow representative is unfortunate, and really quite offensive. It's a pity, really, that an opportunity for an actual meaningful dialogue is lost.

I think there are numerous aspects of the game and its history and technology that the writer could be informed of that might mitigate some offense perceived.

First of all, Resident Evil is by Capcom, a company based not in the USA, but in Japan. Whether that would make a difference is unknown, but perhaps that distance or difference might be helpful. With a less sharp perception of the tenseness of racial issues in the US especially, Japanese games often make errors of political correctness or interpretation, often to their cost. Perhaps this is an example of that? An American made game might avoid such outwardly black antagonists.

Secondly, it might be beneficial to let the writer know that this is the latest in an extremely long-standing series, which has long had the hero (usually white males, but often strong females… points for that?) killing whites, until recently breaking away into killing of ignorant infected Spanish villagers (much like the African/Haitian villagers presented in the trailer). The killing of Spaniards was never questioned.

Thirdly, and I think this is the most important thing, does she actually have any knowledge of the limitations of the console itself? There were references in the original article to the natives seeming dull and simian even before their transformation. But could she just be referring to the Uncanny Valley effect in ignorance? This is the term given to the point of animation (originally theorized for robotics, but now applied to animation) at which the animation looks close enough to human to be creepy, but not enough to look convincingly real. Could this "not quite right"ness be not racism but polygon count? Could it be that rendering and animation techniques, not to mention experience, developed for "white" skintones simply don't work as well with the differing negroid features? Are these legitimate factors? Is a technical limitation or experience really the same as true racism?

Just in conclusion, I don't think there's any basis for the racism criticism for Resident Evil 5. But there is some basis for criticism generally. There have been a large number of recent examples of games inadvertently containing content that was objectionable in one country or culture. Brain Age and Mario Party 8 both were found to contain words that were not "politically correct" in our society, calling players spastics and retards. Which is offensive to… you know… spastic retards. Resident Evil 5 we've already discussed, but another Capcom title, Zack & Wiki, made smaller waves the same day for its inclusion of the phrase Allahu akbar, which translates to "God is most Great" and is one of the most commonly stated religious terms in the world. Second only to "Oh my God!", or "Jesus H Christ, what do you think you're doing, Mary?". How much of this is just people taking offense where none is intended? Some, that's kind of a given. I don't mean to suggest the Islamic world occasionally is quick to offense, but let's just say our three panel Mohammed comic got cancelled due to fear of extreme death.

Regardless, though, these mistakes cost companies. They cost money, to fix, redevelop, re-release. A lot of companies, especially Japanese companies like Capcom and Nintendo, would do well to think carefully about hiring to be over-sensitive about their content to see how it plays beyond the attitudes and opinions of the home market.