So the whole "cozy farming/town building/etc. games are colonialist/imperialist in nature" discourse that's going around these days:
Like, I firmly do believe that it's not the worst thing in the world to examine underlying reasons - Conscious or unconscious - For why something might appeal to you/an audience in-general.
And sure, there probably are some societal factors that lead to certain things being used as shorthand or jumping off points that do often go unexamined - Like, the idea of there being a terra nullis that you can no-muss-no-fuss-no-complicated history of colonialism/displacement/genocide is definitely one that does often just get used unquestioningly. And there certainly could be some interesting discussions about whether or not that should be such a default.
But, like, at the same time - This is explicitly escapism. Fantasy of a sorts (depending on the game/setting, it might explicitly not be the real world). These scenarios, unless otherwise stated are taking place in a true terra nullis - Nobody had to suffer anywhere in this place's history. Build your animal people village or cozy little farm without even having to think about this sort of thing.
But it's not always so simple, is it?
Any game that includes side-tasks centered around finding treasures/artifacts, exploring ruins, etc.? Well, now, that implies that this was not truly a terra nullis after all. And yeah, that can raise some implications. Much of the time, it still falls back to something like *Oh, they all died long, long before you/your current civilization got here - Don't even worry about it!"
You don't want to think about your character's potential complicity/inheritance of a legacy of genocide when you're playing a cozy farm sim game. You just want to make a nice, efficient farm, and arrange found trinkets in a satisfying manner. You just want to curate your village to look like a 1:1 recreation of your favourite Skyrim town, but with silly animal people. Sometimes it's just the skin that's wrapped around your "make the numbers match up in a satisfying manner" exercise. Sometimes it's all about the stories and playing a role as given to you by the set-up.
You're allowed to have escapism without having to turn into Chidi from The Good Place, agonizing over whether everything is 100% ethical from all angles and possible implications.
And people are allowed to think about things from those points of view and decide for themselves if they really enjoy these sorts of games after all.
And there are some games out there that do invite you to think about these sorts of things - Sometimes explicitly, sometimes subtly.
Like, I play Satisfactory, which has a few of these elements - Terraforming an alien world - A supposedly true terra nullis as far as the scenario is concerned - And while resource extraction and manufacturing isn't a cozy pastoral farm, there still is a deep level of well, satisfaction, that comes with arranging things just-so, such that you have an aesthetically-pleasing factory colony, and one in which all of your processes' rates sync just right that it all flows smoothly to get you the components you need.
But it's also a running joke of sorts between me and friends who play about well, just how much sprawling machinery you can into a formerly pristine wilderness. The game might not outright say "Look how horrible this all is for the environment here", but you can't really look upon your creation and not see the horrible transformation the once beautiful natural landscape has undergone.
In the end, though - I've only despoiled a digital canvas, so to speak. No guilt needs hang over my head for finding joy in my colossal monstrosity of a factory. (Other than perhaps I need to work on improving my efficiency. I love my tangle of conveyor belts, but maybe I should plan my machines better so that they're not always backed up and stalled out).
And, like, these people complaining about Stardew Valley or Minecraft being imperialist and then saying people shouldn't enjoy them (Admittedly that last bit seems only to exist as a theoretical strawman to argue against and get mad at/about - I can't say I've honestly seen anyone claiming that nobody should be allowed to enjoy them) - Have they run out of complaints about other game genres? I know that nothing should get a free pass by merit of something else being worse, but I am curious as to where their logic would lead in terms of whether any games with any sort of abstraction/story should be enjoyed, ever.
Have... Have they seen other genres of games, at all?
Like, I also love the 4X genre, but that one explicitly encourages imperialism. The Xs include "exploit" and "exterminate", specifically. And yes, there have been criticisms of this genre too, but I can't say I've seen people vilified in the same way as this last round of criticism lobbed at cozy games.
There's plenty of games whose entire goal is just "kill everyone else" - PC, NPC, mob, etc.
Again, though - I'm not outright against criticism/reexamination of things from different angles or anything like that.
Honestly, the sci-fi and fantasy genres have had some absolutely fantastic developments stemming from the line of thinking of "Hey, does it feel a little off/icky to have expressly sapient races that are universally evil/bad and therefore okay to in-turn slaughter without hesitation?" This reexamination has led to plenty of games where Orcs and Goblins and such aren't just stock villains and cannon fodder - They have their own actual motivations beyond "Pillage and kill! Just because!", they're full-fledged factions that can be reasoned with, negotiated with - Dealt with in ways that don't necessitate violence.
Like, sure, if you have a certain style of game, you'll need foes. And making them "monsters" is often an easy strategy to avoid having to think about why it's okay/good/fine to kill them. But if they're all purely mindless or bestial, it gets a little repetitive - So, yeah, you add in ones that can think too. But at that point, they ought to have the capacity to question what they're doing and why, and thus, should have the freedom to not just default to doing bad guy stuff for the sake of it. And then from there - Writing them to always be evil anyway kind of does feel lazy/reductive and willfully, pointedly avoidant on a subject that should be considered.
I don't know if I have a point to all this. Yes, it's fine to enjoy things. Yes, it's often good to question underlying assumptions - Including and often especially things presented as "idealistic" and "harmless". Yes, consumption of media can lead to self-reinforcement if ideas, including potentially harmful or toxic ones. But also, yes, sometimes, things aren't necessarily as deep as they have the potential to be.
Sometimes it's just "If I had a small corner of the world to make my own, what would I do with it?"
Sometimes it is "If I could take over the world and make it align with my vision, what would I do with it?"
Sometimes it is "If I could take over the world and expressly be like, a cartoon supervillain, what would I do with it?"
People's escapism often isn't meant to be problematic. Or examine how things might be problematic.
Sometimes, it is something that would be expressly problematic outside the confines of the theoretical/simulated.
People are allowed to enjoy problematic things.
People are allowed to indulge in fantasies that aren't completely selfless or altruistic. As long as they're not going out there and actually harming other people/the world/whatever -- What does it ultimately matter?
