If anyone is actually worried about meat being used to create cutscenes, and how meat was ‘used to create the game’… then surely you couldn’t justifiably consume any form of media? Surely nearly every TV show, film or game has staff that are have eaten meat at some point in the process to fuel themselves. Then how can you separate meat consumption from the production of any media? Is anyone actually concerned about this, or is it clickbait?
The headline is click bait imo but the article makes a somewhat valid point about the larger use of animal products in everything. The article lists paper money in the UK as an example so a vegan is essentially unable to use paper money without conflicting with their ideals.
I would say the point of articles like this is a reasonable way to bring awareness of how ubiquitous animal products are in everyday items.
I think it’s a valid topic with a headline written by marketing (and their 696 “partners”) and an article written by someone with a point to make.
Yes that’s fair - I’d certainly advocate every day items using alternative products wherever possible and people generally reducing their meat consumption. But the comparison between processes that use meat products continuously against a case where a piece of meat was filmed once to make a computer model that can then be replicated infinitely seems odd to me and a stretch to argue that ‘it’s impossible to be vegan and play Dragon’s Dogma 2’.
But if the intention is to raise awareness, fair enough!
I’m vegan, and there are varying layers of seriousness to which people take being vegan. The goal is generally to avoid exploitation of animals wherever practicable. But I work at a bakery, if there’s extra cheese sticks that we will not profit off of, that will either be wasted at the night or I can grab them, are they “vegan”?
Some would say yes, some no, and some will say that I can’t work at a non-vegan bakery while being a vegan. Those are also all fair options, I’m not annoyed with people who think the last one, I just wish I could avoid it fully. (I tend to grab stuff for my omnivorous husband, but not myself, which some vegans would also have a problem with, and I try to sneak one or two things to set neatly outside in case anyone is hungry, which doesn’t go far enough for most people)
The problem behind this game for more dedicated vegans is not arising out of this game, but probably out of beyond meat (possibly a competitor), which used lots of real meat for side by side taste tests. Some agree with you that a finite use can essentially be washed off a product with enough time (and given that we’d have to start without the technology of knives, if we’re being 100% pure about no exploitation in the development history, to a certain degree, everyone believes this), but some think that because the company exists and profits because of animal suffering (which is objectively true), it can never be vegan.
I think it’s basically the same problem, except that I would not believe that a single person purchased the game because of the meat scenes. This makes it an even more frivolous use of meat, but also removes the profit motive for the meat, so I can see lots of different positions where vegans could find themselves.
If anyone is actually worried about meat being used to create cutscenes, and how meat was ‘used to create the game’… then surely you couldn’t justifiably consume any form of media? Surely nearly every TV show, film or game has staff that are have eaten meat at some point in the process to fuel themselves. Then how can you separate meat consumption from the production of any media? Is anyone actually concerned about this, or is it clickbait?
The headline is click bait imo but the article makes a somewhat valid point about the larger use of animal products in everything. The article lists paper money in the UK as an example so a vegan is essentially unable to use paper money without conflicting with their ideals.
I would say the point of articles like this is a reasonable way to bring awareness of how ubiquitous animal products are in everyday items.
I think it’s a valid topic with a headline written by marketing (and their 696 “partners”) and an article written by someone with a point to make.
Yes that’s fair - I’d certainly advocate every day items using alternative products wherever possible and people generally reducing their meat consumption. But the comparison between processes that use meat products continuously against a case where a piece of meat was filmed once to make a computer model that can then be replicated infinitely seems odd to me and a stretch to argue that ‘it’s impossible to be vegan and play Dragon’s Dogma 2’.
But if the intention is to raise awareness, fair enough!
I’m vegan, and there are varying layers of seriousness to which people take being vegan. The goal is generally to avoid exploitation of animals wherever practicable. But I work at a bakery, if there’s extra cheese sticks that we will not profit off of, that will either be wasted at the night or I can grab them, are they “vegan”?
Some would say yes, some no, and some will say that I can’t work at a non-vegan bakery while being a vegan. Those are also all fair options, I’m not annoyed with people who think the last one, I just wish I could avoid it fully. (I tend to grab stuff for my omnivorous husband, but not myself, which some vegans would also have a problem with, and I try to sneak one or two things to set neatly outside in case anyone is hungry, which doesn’t go far enough for most people)
The problem behind this game for more dedicated vegans is not arising out of this game, but probably out of beyond meat (possibly a competitor), which used lots of real meat for side by side taste tests. Some agree with you that a finite use can essentially be washed off a product with enough time (and given that we’d have to start without the technology of knives, if we’re being 100% pure about no exploitation in the development history, to a certain degree, everyone believes this), but some think that because the company exists and profits because of animal suffering (which is objectively true), it can never be vegan.
I think it’s basically the same problem, except that I would not believe that a single person purchased the game because of the meat scenes. This makes it an even more frivolous use of meat, but also removes the profit motive for the meat, so I can see lots of different positions where vegans could find themselves.
Can’t speak for the author as to their intentions, but that’s what I took from it.
I’m not vegan, I’m not trying to speak for others, but it is my takeaway that the point is an animals life is worth less than a digital steak.