Dustborn was a game that many gamers were excited about when it was first announced. It presented itself as a post-apocalyptic narrative-driven adventure with an interesting art style, a diverse cast of characters, and a world where words literally have power. Unfortunately, what could have been a unique and engaging game quickly found itself embroiled in controversy and criticism due to its overwhelming focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) messaging. Rather than letting the gameplay and story stand on their own, Dustborn leaned so heavily into promoting social ideologies that it alienated a large portion of its audience.
In this blog, we’ll dive into why Dustborn ultimately failed as a game, how its focus on pushing DEI agendas overshadowed everything else, and what this failure can teach us about the dangers of over-politicizing media in the gaming industry.
What is Dustborn?
Developed by Red Thread Games, Dustborn is a story-driven, road-trip adventure set in a dystopian future where a fractured America is divided into warring factions. You play as Pax, a woman with mysterious word-based superpowers, as she and her ragtag group of misfits travel across the country on a dangerous journey. Dustborn promised a mix of narrative depth, comic-book aesthetics, and unique gameplay where words could be used as weapons in combat.
On paper, Dustborn had a lot of potential. The concept of using words as literal weapons, the post-apocalyptic setting, and the idea of a story-driven game focused on personal relationships were intriguing. Red Thread Games also had a decent pedigree, having worked on the Dreamfall series, which was well-received for its storytelling.
However, Dustborn took a misstep early on by positioning itself not just as a game but as a vehicle for progressive social messaging. Instead of creating a story that naturally included diverse characters and themes, it felt as though the game was designed around pushing political ideologies, which became a central focus to its detriment.
How DEI and “Woke” Ideologies Overwhelmed the Game
Dustborn quickly became a symbol of how gaming can fail when political or social ideologies take center stage. The game’s marketing was saturated with discussions about diversity and inclusion, and interviews with the developers often focused more on the importance of representation than on the actual gameplay or mechanics. As a result, Dustborn’s narrative felt more like a sermon on social justice than a compelling, engaging story.
Forced Diversity and Unrelatable Characters One of the core problems with Dustborn was that its characters felt more like symbols of diversity than actual people. Instead of being complex and relatable, many of the characters were one-dimensional and seemed to exist solely to tick off representation checkboxes. For example, the game prominently featured characters from various marginalized groups, but their identities were so heavily emphasized that it felt forced and unnatural.
While diversity in games is essential, it becomes a problem when it’s so blatant that it breaks immersion. Gamers want to connect with characters on a personal level, not be constantly reminded that these characters exist to push an agenda. Dustborn’s diverse cast could have been celebrated if they had been given proper depth and development, but instead, they became hollow figures representing ideologies rather than real people.
Political Messaging Over Gameplay Dustborn also suffered because of its overt focus on political messaging. The game’s dialogue often felt like it was lifted from social justice manifestos, with characters constantly discussing issues like oppression, marginalization, and identity politics. While these are important topics, they felt shoehorned into the game in a way that distracted from the plot and gameplay.
The political tone of the game alienated a significant portion of its potential audience. Many players felt like they were being preached to rather than entertained, and the heavy-handedness of the messaging turned what could have been an engaging experience into something tedious and frustrating. The game was less about storytelling and gameplay, and more about pushing a social agenda.
Gameplay Takes a Backseat Because Dustborn was so focused on its social and political commentary, the gameplay was often neglected. Reviews from major gaming outlets such as IGN and Gamespot were quick to point out that while the game had interesting concepts, the execution left much to be desired. Combat, which involved using words as weapons, was novel but quickly grew repetitive and lacked depth. There wasn’t enough focus on refining the mechanics, and as a result, the gameplay felt shallow and underdeveloped.
Critics also noted that Dustborn’s pacing was slow, with long stretches of dialogue and exposition that bogged down the experience. Instead of providing players with engaging action or puzzles, the game often felt like it was dragging the player through long monologues about the game’s themes and messages. This slow pace, combined with the shallow gameplay, made it difficult for players to stay invested.
The Backlash and Ultimate Failure of Dustborn
As reviews and player feedback started to pour in, it became clear that Dustborn had missed the mark. Many players felt that the game’s focus on DEI messaging had come at the expense of crafting a compelling experience. Instead of being drawn into the world and its characters, players were put off by the heavy-handed politics and lackluster gameplay.
Even on platforms like Reddit, discussions around Dustborn became heated. Many gamers felt that the game was a prime example of how pushing “woke” ideologies can hurt the quality of a game. While there were some who defended the game’s themes, the general consensus was that Dustborn had failed to strike the right balance between storytelling and political messaging. The game was quickly labeled as another casualty of “woke culture” in gaming, and it struggled to find an audience beyond those who were already deeply invested in social justice issues.
Sales of Dustborn were lackluster, and the game quickly faded into obscurity. What was once seen as a promising title ended up being a cautionary tale about the dangers of over-politicizing games. The gaming community’s response to Dustborn highlights a growing frustration with the trend of prioritizing social messaging over gameplay and entertainment.
Lessons Learned from Dustborn’s Failure
Dustborn’s failure offers several important lessons for game developers moving forward:
Story Comes First No matter how important a game’s message may be, it should never come at the expense of the story or gameplay. Games are meant to be immersive experiences, and when the narrative is too focused on pushing a political agenda, it can alienate players and detract from the overall experience.
Natural Diversity is Key Diversity in games is essential, but it should feel natural and organic. Characters should be written as people first, with their identities as part of their story, not the whole focus. Forced representation can feel disingenuous and patronizing, which ultimately hurts the very cause it's trying to support.
Balance Messaging with Gameplay If a game wants to address social or political issues, it needs to find the right balance between messaging and gameplay. Players come to games for entertainment, and if the messaging overtakes the fun, they’re likely to abandon the game altogether. Developers need to find a way to integrate these themes without compromising the core gaming experience.
Comments