This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Doki Doki Literature Club Redesign Controversy as a «mise en abyme» of Certain Culture War Issues
I saw a small-scale controversy on Tik-tok (ugggggh, I know right?) recently. First let me give the background. Doki Doki Literature Club (DDLC) is a knock-off visual novel, in the same way that California Champagne is a knock off of Champagne. Visual novels are the video game version of anime and manga and as a consequence, they can only be produced in the Japan region of Asia. They are not really video games, but more like something in between a manga and an anime delivered in .exe format on a computer. The only dynamic element they have is a tradition of branching choices, which anime and manga cannot do.
Anyway, it is not that important that DDLC is a knockoff, except that it provides some background for the type of people who like it. The art of this knockoff is quite faithful to the real deal, but the story is not. I have never played it and am not planning on it, because I am a snob, but from what I have gathered, it's like the anime girl version of Depression Quest. It also features a lot of annoying deconstructive quotes like, «these girls are like if you took all of the traits that make someone human and just took the cute bits» said by the player character in the middle of it. Quite rude for some foreigners to do, no? Kind of like making something in California called Champagne but you somehow criticize the concept of using Chardonnay grapes and making it have gas in it while you're at it, while taking the alcohol out of it for tee-totaling Americans. Almost like it's a product of hatred for the original thing.
Well, it will turn out that you will of course get a lot of fans that hate the fact that it comes in a wine bottle. The wine bottle of DDLC is that the characters look like cartoon, moe, teenage anime girls. They have round faces, big eyes, cute mannerisms, and wear bows and and school uniforms for most of the VN, as is customary.
Here are some examples of official art from the game.
Now, what if they were designed to look like real girls? Obviously they would look like this, right (edit: this is one of the original redesign posts)? Well no, because they obviously look like cross dressing men here. The fact that those redesigns look like men is now being denied by real girls who look nothing like those men.
I can only describe this as gas-lighting. And it perfectly parallels the way gender discourse from the left happens in the broader culture war. Transgenderism of course is the biggest gas-light of them all, but feminism broadly is filled with some of the most bald-faced untruths of any political ideology. Many feminists believe women aren't mentally different from men, and can beat men in fights, for example. On the trans issue, we are supposed to believe that people can be born the wrong sex, that sex doesn't exist, that there is, in a meaningful sense, more than two sexes, and that sex changing operations are good for people. To me, these claims are about as credible as the claim that those redesigns look at all like 16 year old girls with two X chromosomes and not cross-dressing men. It is hard for me to understand how blind or dishonest one must be to really make those claims.
Do you mean this in a literal linguistic way, as in if it doesn't come in Japan it doesn't technically count as a "visual novel" even if it's identical in every way, as in the Champagne example? Because this is entirely false. Neither "visual" nor "novel" are Japanese words. We don't have an equivalent word in English because that's what these are.
Or do you mean this in a less literal but more meaningful way, as in only the Japanese have the cultural competence to actually make one of these any good. Because I would mostly agree with that, I don't think I've ever seen a decent visual novel come from anywhere other than Japan even if hypothetically one could.
Warning: extremely pretentious weeb discussion below.
Personally, I would argue that they are different in the first way; in my view, the difference between a "visual novel" in the Western and Japanese sense is a semantic shift, in the same way that " マンション / mansion" in Japanese means a small apartment, but "mansion" in English means a large free-standing house, with connotations of land and status.
In the Western context, visual novels are really just considered cheap porn, and even when Western indies try to surpass this definition, it's much like trying to build a bigger apartment to try and re-create a mansion (in the English sense). Apartments are great and all (as many Western indie games are pretty great), but fundamentally they're just contained in different categories.
In contrast, there is a Japanese otaku subculture where visual novels are considered a serious artform, and as a result there are real auteurs, who would have been acclaimed authors of high society in another life, who end up in a position of writing high-budget erotic games (although again, "エロゲー / erotic games" is a bit of a semantic shift, the difference between Hot Singles In Your Area and Lolita).
For example, I would consider White Album 2, Ore-tachi ni Tsubasa wa Nai and Albatross Koukairoku (amongst others) to be legitimate works of literary art that equal or surpass much of the actual literary canon; there's frankly no Western "visual novel" that would even come close in my estimation.
I agree with your object level criticisms about how Westerners have approached this problem, but would categorize all of that under the second way. If a certain culture or group of people publish a bunch of smut novels and can't figure out how to write a decent novel they're still "novels", just not very good ones. If they start filming and publishing porn films, they're still "films". It's the same type of media, even if it's only one specific genre within that media. Visual novel is a form of media, and it's trivial to make something that's in the media. It's highly nontrivial to make one that's good. A mansion is a type of house. A building is a structure which can contain many different types and serve many different purposes. I argue that the word "visual novel" is more akin to "building", and the West can make those. You don't look at a log cabin and say "it's not a building because it's smaller than this mansion". They're not the same, they're not really in the same ballpark in terms of quality. But in a literal and linguistic way they are still the same category of object.
Yeah I think we're 99% on the same page here, that the Japanese are building mansions (of varying quality of course, most "authentic" Japanese visual novels are still awful, as most of everything is awful) while Westerners are only constructing a bunch of log cabins (apart from Katawa Shoujo as someone mentioned downthread, which is structurally identical to a Japanese mansion except in language).
I would say the difference between your viewpoint and mine is that I think to further torture this metaphor, that Westeners view the definition of "building" as identical to the definition of "log cabin" and cannot imagine a building to be like anything else that isn't a log cabin. DDLC broke fairly hard out of containment, and while Salvato himself is pretty tapped into Japanese VN culture, normie reception to DDLC was generally along the lines of "this is the only good visual novel, how did he do it?", which isn't helped by how the game is framed, from the normie perspective at least, as a structural deconstruction of every other visual novel being a cheap dating sim.
In Japan, while obviously still extremely niche relative to broader society, the conception of the building as something greater than a log cabin actually exists, and by extension the idea of the visual novel as an actual artform actually exists. Typing this out it sounds extremely pretentious, but I think this conception of "the building as greater than the log cabin" purely exists only amongst the Japanese and highly Japanese-influenced people, and hence it wouldn't really be wrong to claim that it's different in a real, linguistic way.
I don't think this is quite right. Because obviously a significant fraction of westerners have played Japanese visual novels and are aware of what can be done. And while this is not the normie, even the normie anime-viewer, neither are the people making western visual novels. The average normie does not write their own visual novel. And when someone who clearly does know and care about visual novels makes one, like DDLC, it's still not a full length visual novel. Not because they don't know or care, but because they can't.
The real issue is infrastructure. The big fancy good mansion visual novels in Japan cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, involve many high quality writers, artists, and voice actors. Anyone in the West who imagines a full length real visual novel cannot get the funding to make it, and cannot find/hire voice actors who would both be willing to work on the project, and good enough to do it well. There ARE no Western equivalents to Rie Kugimiya, Tomokazu Sugita, or Mamoru Miyano.
It's not merely an issue of imagination. Anyone can imagine things. It's the technology and infrastructure required to take that imagination and turn it into reality. And I suppose in some sense this is downstream of culture and imagination. The majority of Western audience imagine and ask for log cabins, so none of the investors or talents try to create this infrastructure. And if some rich visionary made an expensive AAA visual novel it probably wouldn't sell enough to recoup its costs, so the investors aren't wrong. But it's more complicated than simply "no one can imagine anything better". We can clearly see the better things, which is how you and I are talking about them right now. But even the most skilled and creative architect can't go out into the woods with nothing more than a rusty hatchet and make themselves a mansion. Individual people with ideas can only make indie games.
While I agree with you that budget is certainly a factor, I think budget alone kind of overstates the case that you're trying to make.
Two of the most influential visual novels in the genre, Tsukihime and Higurashi, were both literally created by a couple dudes in a basement each, and while certainly not gold-plated 6-figure mansion experiences, still vastly outstrip the scope, ambition and quality of any Western visual novel I'm aware of. Maybe they're kinda shabby mansions, but they're clearly larger and of different provenance to the log cabins.
Visual novels are like, the cheapest medium out there to create behind literal novels; while you certainly need budget for the best graphics and voice actors, you can get very far by just having a good writer, a good artist and a good composer.
While I agree that there's no, say, Western Clannad because of budgetary reasons, I think it's much more a deficiency of vision (and frankly, skill, because all the competent people do something respectable instead) that is why no serious Western competitor to something like Tsukihime or Higurashi exists.
Ahem. The OG Clannad might disagree about that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link