Jimquisition: Tomodachi Strife

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

Sticky:
Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Sheo_Dagana:
It makes me extremely sad to see Nintendo doing this, and I will not be buying the game as a result, unless I hear of them patching the option back into the game (rather than simply promising to include it in 'future' games.) However, it's not entirely unpredictable since the Japanese culture has a very different view on homosexuality than we do. This does not excuse them of course, Nintendo has been making games for a western audience for years, so there's no way they don't know what's going to work for us and what won't, but Jim makes the best point about this in relation to inclusion/exclusion and the political associations we make with it.

For a company that's not doing extraordinarily well, not to mention with E3 just around the corner, it's odd that Nintendo's PR department didn't see this bad press coming and take steps to handle it better. They aren't exactly in a good position to fall from the good graces of their audience.

http://miiquality.tumblr.com/

Please direct your attention to 3:35 that is all

Redd the Sock:
The lemming readers, never one to avoid a good twitter shaming of perceived bigotry, didn't stop to ask about context, and went on to vent their usual vitriol about how the rest of the world hasn't come about to the correct way of thinking.

As opposed the the people who disagree with them, who went about this completely calmly, and never once posted an angry rant comparing those people to Nazis. And never once boiled down the complexity of many different people's opinions to "SJW,"

I mean, as if people could have varying degrees of opinion and aren't all members of a groupthink activist cabal. That's just crazy talk. Obviously nobody would ever express their individual opinions without the consent of the hive mind.

Uriel-238:
Discrimination is rampant in an unregulated market, and we've since realized that equal treatment is one of the market rules we have to enforce by law. The notion that we can let storekeepers set the policies they want works only in an environment in which there is perfect competition. (That is to say, there is a superfluous number of competing businesses, some of which do serve any given demographic, and all businesses are instantly accessible to a given customer.) In reality a customer's access to a market is contingent on limits of locality, on obstacles to new start-ups, on closed markets and price fixing, and on a countless number of other anti-competitive practices. So no, people often do not have access to goods and services they want when discrimination is allowed. If Mississippi businesses are allowed to deny service to someone on the grounds that they are gay, I wonder if they are also allowed to deny business to someone on the grounds that they are black or Jewish or a woman. If not, I suspect the laws that protect the latter demographics from discrimination should, by the same intent, protect gays as well...and gamers, and gun enthusiasts, and atheists, and pretty much anyone else who is non-mainstream.

In my opinion you pointed out what the problem is, but came to the wrong conclusion. The problem isn't the freedom to discriminate, but the insane government regulation that restricts competition. The problems of "obstacles to new start-ups, on closed markets and price fixing, and on a countless number of other anti-competitive practices" are all imposed by government. Government rules tend to be imposed slowly and are hard to remove once they are in place. This means that a community can used government to restrict something, but when that community changes they have a hard time removing those restrictions. So people need to stop using government to try to solve their problems, it is far to slow and incompetent to be much use for most things, particularly social issues. Government should only be used to protect it's citizens from the use of force, anything else and you have tyranny.

Dragonbums:

AdagioBoognish:

So AI is controlling who your Mii is trying to hook up with? I assumed you were controlling your little avatar, so the whole idea of having checks for orientation didn't make any sense at all. If you're not controlling your character, then does having your sprite get married actually matter to the gamer? This style of game doesn't appeal to me in general, so I don't get it. Are there any Nintendo fans out there that can tell us if having in game relationships is something that would make or break Tomodachi Life for you?

If I'm not mistaken you have no control over who your Mii's partner up with. The only control you have is how you customize them, and what they eat....that's about it.

Everything else is up to game code chance.

Yeah, no, it's massively disappointing. And looking back, it's probably just because they cut a corner. It was, simply, easier not to code in same-sex marriage. Nothing about civil rights or equality. Just a mediocre product that fails to represent the complexity of reality. The only real story is their dumbass response.

And the real story is that Nintendo was so terrified of admitting that they cut corners when making their time waster that they'd rather stick their foot in their mouth with a politically incorrect statement.

Houseman:

josh4president:
So how long until someone throws up the whole 'danger of inclusion' argument like what happened with Mass Effect?

"If we allow the Gay Tomadachis, then we have to allow PEDOPHILE Tomadachis as well!" or what not?

I came in here to present an argument like that.

Where do we draw the line between including something and not including something? The first thing that pops into my head is the people on tumblr who make up their own pronouns to refer to themselves. Do "life" games have to have customization options so that you can be a ship, or a squid, or a fox, or a cup of water, or else they're making a "political statement"?

You can only make so many assets in a game. We can't possibly include everyone and everything people identify as.

Where is the line?

If, for example, they didn't include same-sex marriage because they just didn't have the money to do so, would this still be a big deal?

I think the difference here is that people can actually be gay they can't actually be a fox. It is entirely within the realms of reality to find someone of the same sex attractive. No matter how much you might want it your just never going to be a squid. At least not until we advance something furious on the genetic engineering front. It's far more important to be able to mirror who you actually are in these games then encompassing everything you could possibly want to be at any given moment. So it's not the same thing at all.

WeepingAngels:

Mcoffey:

WeepingAngels:
Inclusion should be the default? Oh boy that's could lead to all kinds of things like marrying kids and animals. I am betting that even Jim draws the line somewhere and then inclusion would not be the default.

False equivalancy for the win! Because being gay is the same as being a pedophile!

That's not what I said. If inclusion is the default, then there is no end. If you draw the line somewhere, you are no longer making inclusion the default.

Zachary Amaranth:

Mcoffey:
False equivalancy for the win! Because being gay is the same as being a pedophile!

And excluding people simply for who they are is exactly the same as excluding illegal activities, don't you know?

Well if you wanna go that route, then should gay marriage in video games only be allowed in states and countries where it is legal?

Including people who choose to enter into a relationship with a consenting adult is obviously not the same as taking advantage of a child who cannot consent. Regardless of the legality of gay marriage. It's a false equivalency.

And the bad reporting continues. Nintendo wouldn't have patched the bug if it didn't "BREAK THE GAME" It caused a data leak, that caused crashes, that made the game unplayable.

Also It kinda is extra work to have things like same sex couples, A whole lot of extra work, but that's really something no one wants to hear.

The events in the game clearly differentiate between a male and female character, one wears the tux, the other the dress, one births the baby and the whole love tropes and so on. Either the game would need a massive rewrite for alternates to things like the child birth, how it decides if the event is a lover thing or a friend thing and what not if you want something different. If you don't care about the events making any sense and just want the whole " married to X " not caring what the game does to it, then it would be a whole lot of work on Nintendo's half programming what would be no better then setting one of the characters to the other gender since clothing and everything else are both genders.

Other then Nintendo said something stupid on an still controversial issue, there's nothing else here.

malnin:

At best your solution would result in every character being bisexual which fixes nothing as my gay characters could still marry the opposite gender and my strait characters could marry the same gender. Also adding in homosexuality would require additional checks for not just for gender but orientation in partners.

How does that not solve everything?

Humans (as a group) are bisexual. Any of us can have relationships with any of the others. What's wrong with allowing your gay characters to marry the opposite gender? that's just like the real world, where gay people do, in fact, have the option (and often use it) of marrying the opposite gender.

If that's not what you want your character to do, then don't romance people of the opposite gender. A human is a human, and should be programmed as such. The only really significant role that gender plays is in reproduction. Otherwise, gender is a very small part of who we are as people.

Coding people as explicitly "gay" or "straight" seems to be a problem society has. Sexuality isn't that simple. It's just social conformity that causes people to adopt such narrow restrictions on their expression as humans.

uanime5:
Given that in many countries gay marriage isn't legal it's no surprise that Nintendo didn't want to include it in a game that they wanted to sell all over the world.

And EA wasn't trying to sell the Sims to everyone in the world and their mom? Yet it still has gay marriage. They sometimes get censored for including it (like Ridiculous Russia giving it an A/O rating), but they show some backbone and just continue making money off non-bigots.

I guess that's the last Jimquisition I'm watching. I thought Jim would be smart enough to do some fact-checking and learn the situation before posting a video about it, but that doesn't seem to be the case. With the premise of his argument being so far off, the rest of the argument falls apart.

I'm hoping his silence in this thread means that he's saving his comments for a follow-up video/post to apologize for fanning the flames of misinformation. It's the least he could do for making an already favorably resolved mess even worse. If he ends up staying silent, then I can't blame him. The few intelligent people calling him out on it are being muffled by the legion of blind followers agreeing with Jim's error. I dare say this is Fox News level of bad.

It's ironic. I've seen people on this website hate on Fox News plenty of times for spreading misinformation, but when The Escapist pulls a Fox News, the vast majority doesn't even notice.

Edit: One more issue I wish to comment on since I haven't seen it around here nearly as much as the other misinformed points:

Pebkio:
Just a mediocre product that fails to represent the complexity of reality.

This isn't the goal of Tomodachi Life at all. The game is supposed to be A QUIRKY AND SILLY ALTERNATE WORLD! This is one of the most basic things to know about Tomodachi Life; how could you get that completely wrong?

I'm really tired of this topic now. I'm gonna try to avoid it from now on. Please let this come to a positive resolution.

Scrumpmonkey:

Sticky:
Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Changing a bunch of mii's singing to a bunch of mii's doing a rap battle is changing a bunch of text boxes.

Also changing two people dressed up in sumo outfits running into each other and pushing to two people in football outfits running into each other and pushing is just changing avatar outfits. ((also we know what sumo is out in the west nintendo ;p))

They aren't changing the hard code or core mechanics of the game, which what would be needed.

Transdude1996:
Part of the reason Tomodachi Life didn't intend have gay marriage in the first place was because Japan doesn't accept it as a whole

Funny enough, Japan only stopped accepting it because of western ideals.

Oda Nobunaga was known for being bisexual.

And we wasn't the only famous Japanese lord to be openly bi-sexual, as I understand it.

It was only when Christianity made its way to Japan that it started being shunned.

Jasper van Heycop:

uanime5:
Given that in many countries gay marriage isn't legal it's no surprise that Nintendo didn't want to include it in a game that they wanted to sell all over the world.

And EA wasn't trying to sell the Sims to everyone in the world and their mom? Yet it still has gay marriage. They sometimes get censored for including it (like Ridiculous Russia giving it an A/O rating), but they show some backbone and just continue making money off non-bigots.

Well if you want to look at the sims, it's been around since 2000 and had 2 main series and like 50 expansions before somewhere in 3 same sex marriage got added. This is Nintendo's second of this game, if anything it'll get added way earlier then it did in the sims series.

Madmanonfire:
I guess that's the last Jimquisition I'm watching. I thought Jim would be smart enough to do some fact-checking and learn the situation before posting a video about it, but that doesn't seem to be the case. With the premise of his argument being so far off, the rest of the argument falls apart.

I'm hoping his silence in this thread means that he's saving his comments for a follow-up video/post to apologize for fanning the flames of misinformation. It's the least he could do for making an already favorably resolved mess even worse. If he ends up staying silent, then I can't blame him. The few intelligent people calling him out on it are being muffled by the legion of blind followers agreeing with Jim's error. I dare say this is Fox News level of bad.

It's ironic. I've seen people on this website hate on Fox News plenty of times for spreading misinformation, but when The Escapist pulls a Fox News, the vast majority doesn't even notice.

Agreed, it's a shame. I'll still watch his show though, since he usually has the guts to admit when he's screwed up. It's a just a shame that so many people don't know some of the facts, like what was actually patched etc.

Sticky:
Nintendo, being competent and professional developers...

Ha! That's the most hilarious and unrealistic thing I've read in an otherwise hilarious and crazy thread!

You don't really believe this, do you? The fact that such a simple thing became a game-breaking bug is pretty much proof of their incompetence as developers. And that's just for this game, and not including how broken and poorly-engineered so much of Nintendo's software is.

Dragonbums:

http://miiquality.tumblr.com/

Well, this is such a great way to address something you see as problematic. Simple, reasonable and to the point. Lots of people here could learn a lot from this guy or whatever he prefer to address ???self.

Loki_The_Good:

I think the difference here is that people can actually be gay they can't actually be a fox.

The people on Tumblr would disagree with you.

It is entirely within the realms of reality to find someone of the same sex attractive. No matter how much you might want it your just never going to be a squid.

People on Tumblr: "*scoff* Look at you telling people what they can and can't be. You're what's wrong with this world. Stop being so inclusionist".

Houseman:

The people on Tumblr would disagree that there are only two genders.

I wasn't talking about humans in general. I was talking about the characters in the game. Try to keep up.

Houseman:

The correct pronouns will have to be used in the text so that there are no grammatical errors,

How would that change anything in the game? The pronouns relate to gender and marital status - so no changes required. A "gay married" husband is still referred to as "husband" in the same way as a "straight-married" one is.

Houseman:
...and things have to branch correctly if, as in the existing glitch, a character is supposed to get pregnant. Perhaps they go to an adoption agency instead of have a "pregnancy" event or something, but that adoption agency still has to get made.

Adoptions don't exist in straight marriages? Many places still outlaw adoption for gay couples. Adoption was not invented with gay marriage, and adoption rights for gay people is still something being fought for.

So, nothing in the game would need to be changed.

Draconalis:

Funny enough, Japan only stopped accepting it because of western ideals.

It was only when Christianity made its way to Japan that it started being shunned.

Fewer than 1% of Japanese people are Christian.

Well said Jim, thank god for you.

Scrumpmonkey:

Sticky:
Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

This is at the behest of the original developers. The localization team adds NOTHING on their own because that would destroy code compatibility.

Those new games and swapped bits with the JP version? The original developers made them. It's being transported into the NA version after bug testing completes.

A localization company is in no position to add or remove features, period.

And at best, this isn't even adding or removing a feature, this is taking an EXISTING feature (minigames) and swapping around their identities. They're still minigames. Therefore the NA and JP versions are still symmetrical.

Please PLEASE research this a bit more.

Aardvaarkman:

Sticky:
Nintendo, being competent and professional developers...

Ha! That's the most hilarious and unrealistic thing I've read in an otherwise hilarious and crazy thread!

You don't really believe this, do you? The fact that such a simple thing became a game-breaking bug is pretty much proof of their incompetence as developers. And that's just for this game, and not including how broken and poorly-engineered so much of Nintendo's software is.

You're being simplistic here. You're assuming that just because their game shipped with a bug (bugs are in all games, I might add) that means they're not competent and professional.

What would be LESS competent and professional, keeping a bug because people like the idea, or fixing the bug?

Transdude1996:
You pointed out about how there's an issue in a state in the US about turning away customers due to the owner having a religuous belief against homosexuality. Well, that's their own fucking right. Owners should have the right to turn away whoever the hell they want. It may not cause their business to do well, but that's the point. America is supposed to be a place where people can say, do, or believe whatever they want and not get attacked for it.

Now I don't live in the United States of America but I can say with some confidence that you cannot, in America, do whatever you want. For example, I am fairly certain you cannot drive on the left side of the road on a highway in New York. You can believe whatever you want and you can say most things you want in America (I imagine you have laws to do with slander, inciting crime, etc.) but your actions can and are bound by laws from various political institutions. This is sometimes to protect the rights of others and sometimes, as in the case of the choice to outlaw driving on the left side of road, to have society function in a more efficient way. In fact if you could do whatever you want anarchy would result and America as a country would cease to be so America is obviously not a place where everyone is supposed to be able to do whatever they want and I don't understand why anyone would want it to.

Transdude1996:
We can't force people to believe something because we disagree with them, all we can do is not support the company or the person. The minute we start telling people how their supposed to think, we become no better than Germany and the Nazis in WW2.

Now Jim didn't say anything about forcing other people to believe as we do. As regards telling other people what to believe. There is a rather big difference between telling somebody that their opinions are stupid, wrong, immoral or whatever and trying to force them to believe as we do. I could assume you were speaking about the latter because obviously I have the right to tell somebody that their opinions are wrong. However, you also say that the only thing we can do is to support or not support a person or company. It really isn't. We can try to persuade them and other people through argument. We can try, even if we would probably fail, to get the not just to do what we want but to understand why we want it. Your solution to dealing with somebody who doesn't agree with you is to try and coŽrce them into saying and doing as you do by not supporting them. I would prefer to try to get them to agree with me by means of reasoned argument.

Now your comparison with the nazi's is just weird to me. Most people I speak to seem to think the most important reason why the nazi's were bad was the genocide against the jews, the homosexuals, the slavish peoples and various other groups. Some people might mention their cruel experimentation on living human beings or things of that nature. The nazi's also violated freedom of speech and to some degree tried to tell people what to think but when it came to people who weren't considered 'Arian' they didn't tell them what to think, they wanted to murder them. A comparison with the spanish inquisition or stalinism might have been more relevant. However, as I said, there is a rather large difference between forcing people to think a certain way, forcing them to speak a certain way and forcing them to act a certain way and you were speaking about the third category here so any comparison to totalitarian regimes seems out of place here.

Now I would like to say something about Jims video. I agree with Jim that the notion that nintendo wasn't trying to make a political statement is not a very good defense but I don't agree with the reasons Jim gives here. The main reason Jim seems to give is that including gay people is not political because most 'normal, well adjusted, modernized' human beings don't think homosexuality is a big deal. Now first of all it isn't entirely clear whether this is a descriptive or a normative statement. The word 'Normal' can be interpreted as both, the word modern might be but honestly 'well adjusted' can't, I think, be interpreted in anything but a normative way. However, if Jim just wanted to say that we ought not make a big deal of including gay people in video games then I don't believe it follows that it isn't a political concern whether or not a company does so. Media influences the way people think which is why we think it is so important to have them portray gay people to begin with. We want to reach people with a certain message. Clearly then, this is a political matter. If however Jim intented to say that most people don't believe homosexuality isn't a big deal and that therefore it isn't a political matter, and I believe that was what he intented to say, I disagree in several ways. Firstly, it flatout isn't the case that the people who believe homosexuality is normal make up the vast majority of people. They make up a large portion of people in certain parts of the world and a smaller portion in other parts but there is hardly any country in the world where there aren't political parties and candidates openly against homosexuality in general. Secondly, even if everybody agreed that homosexuality is completely normal and not a big deal at all this still wouldn't make it an apolitical issue. It would just make it the status quo. To make a comparison, Homer, or the several people who probably wrote the Odessey, was probably not trying to write political commentary about the place of man and women in society with the Odessey. However, the Odessey clearly portrays women and their virtues in a very different light than it does men and their virtues. It clearly is politically relevant in that sense even if it wasn't intended that way and merely represents the opinions, norms and practices that were the status quo at the time. I would argue, against Jim and Nintendo that the choice to include gay people in your game about love (or whatever this game is supposed to be about) is a political decision in any case. You can't simply decide to not think about the politics of it once this has been made clear to you. You might decide that other concerns override the political ones or that you don't think gays are equal to heterosexuals (I would disagree with that but that isn't the issue now). What isn't a defence is that you don't want to be political. You are making a political choice either way. 'Not being political' just means doing what is the status quo because you are too cowardly to do otherwise. This has political consequences.

Aardvaarkman:

Sticky:
Nintendo, being competent and professional developers...

Ha! That's the most hilarious and unrealistic thing I've read in an otherwise hilarious and crazy thread!

You don't really believe this, do you? The fact that such a simple thing became a game-breaking bug is pretty much proof of their incompetence as developers. And that's just for this game, and not including how broken and poorly-engineered so much of Nintendo's software is.

A bug that only appears when the 3ds takes data wirelessly from the wii or somehow from the ds version of the old game. It's not the save feature in battlefield 4 or anything in Aliens CM for starters.

Eve Charm:

Jasper van Heycop:

uanime5:
Given that in many countries gay marriage isn't legal it's no surprise that Nintendo didn't want to include it in a game that they wanted to sell all over the world.

And EA wasn't trying to sell the Sims to everyone in the world and their mom? Yet it still has gay marriage. They sometimes get censored for including it (like Ridiculous Russia giving it an A/O rating), but they show some backbone and just continue making money off non-bigots.

Well if you want to look at the sims, it's been around since 2000 and had 2 main series and like 50 expansions before somewhere in 3 same sex marriage got added. This is Nintendo's second of this game, if anything it'll get added way earlier then it did in the sims series.

It's been included since Vanilla Sims 2 at least. I know that for a fact, it was my introduction to the series and I remember that game mostly because it was one of the first games to include gay relationships without making them a horrible misrepresentation and/or a joke.

EDIT http://sims.wikia.com/wiki/Same-sex_relationship waddaya know? It has been a feature in every Sims installment, with the exception that Sims 1 has no same sex marriage, only same sex relationships.

People, japan never had any problem with gay people. They never prosecuted them or discriminated them, As far as marriage goes, i don't know what their philosophy on that was but I do know they were not allowed to marry, only to live together and be recognized as a couple by people. I would guess it's down to not being able to bear children conceived in union but that's a wild guess.

So they never really recognized them but never discriminated as western world did. They just turned the blind eye and acknowledged moving on like nothing happened. That's what I always got from my understanding of their culture from past. But same also went for pedophilia, zoofilia etc...

That said, in middle east love between humans and animals is recognized to the point of having separate direction of their traditional poetry. Guess if Nintendo releases Tomodachi Life there they will have to do something about that too :D

Aardvaarkman:

I wasn't talking about humans in general. I was talking about the characters in the game. try to keep up.

And only having a select set of characters in the game would still be exclusionist, by the logic if "not including something is exclusionist"

How would that change anything in the game? The pronouns relate to gender and marital status - so no changes required.

Someone would have to go in there and change every static instance of "her" to "his", and "her" to "him" for instance, or at least variabalize the script.

Adoptions don't exist in straight marriages?

Not in the game they don't. In the game, the female gets pregnant as far as I know. There is no option for adoption. However, if you were to implement gay marriage with children, you have to make new assets, or at the very least write script that explains what happened off screen. Either way, it costs time and money.

Many places still outlaw adoption for gay couples. So no, adoption was not invented with gay marriage. So, nothing in the game would need to be changed.

So they would just cut out the "pregnancy/baby" part entirely? That's a change. That costs time and money.
And that'd make for a shorter game, essentially worsening the experience for people who choose gay marriage.

carnex:

You didn't consider me! is as bad. It' business the way i see it by being as stupid. I'm born Serbian and therefor I'm limited in great many was, internationally based on whole lot of lies and you don't see me shaming people. And that's real life, not some damn game.

What do you mean by "shaming people"? When I think of "shaming," I think of punishments such as people being forced to stand on a street corner wearing a sign saying "I AM A THIEF" or something. Which is not what is happening here.

What people are doing is saying that "Nintendo should be ashamed" - which is an entirely different thing. This is just people using their right to free speech to speak out against Nintendo. That is not the same as shaming - and is not even remotely the same as a business refusing to serve somebody just because they don't like their race/gender/religion, etc.

Saying that people speaking out about this is the same as direct discrimination is a classic false equivalency. Especially as nobody is saying that heterosexual relationships should be removed from the games, which is what the real bigots are doing - but in real life.

Jasper van Heycop:

Eve Charm:

Jasper van Heycop:

And EA wasn't trying to sell the Sims to everyone in the world and their mom? Yet it still has gay marriage. They sometimes get censored for including it (like Ridiculous Russia giving it an A/O rating), but they show some backbone and just continue making money off non-bigots.

Well if you want to look at the sims, it's been around since 2000 and had 2 main series and like 50 expansions before somewhere in 3 same sex marriage got added. This is Nintendo's second of this game, if anything it'll get added way earlier then it did in the sims series.

It's been included since Vanilla Sims 2 at least. I know that for a fact, it was my introduction to the series and I remember that game mostly because it was one of the first games to include gay relationships without making them a horrible misrepresentation and/or a joke.

Ah well much earlier then I thought. Sim's relationships are still pretty much a joke on their own as a whole tho >.<

Alterego-X:

Fewer than 1% of Japanese people are Christian.

That doesn't change the fact that they adopted the stances from the west, which predominately Christian.

Before they opened their borders to the west in Meiji era, Japan did not have a religion that shunned homosexuality, thus they didn't.

Wow, been through the entire thread, and I find it hilarious, in the cynical sort of way, that all the people accusing Jim of being misinformed if not knowingly lying are themselves, misinformed, as I've yet to see any of these people actually explain what happened correctly. Just for those of you who are apparently hard of hearing, here is, word for word, what Jim said where people are accusing him of lying:

So yeah, he didn't lie, so please stop pretending that he did, people. All those claims are accurate. He didn't specify what the bug was that resulted in same-sex marriage in the game getting patched out, but he did specify that it was patched out due to a bug. He didn't bring attention to the fact that it was patched out. He brought attention to the extremely stupid rationale they presented for excluding it in the first place.

Additionally, shortly after the bit that I quoted, he said this:

"When it could've just stuck to its guns and said that the stuff wasn't in the original version, or it could've just kept its whole mouth fucking shut, someone over their parted their lips and did a stupid."

Funny thing is, thats absolutely true. If the press release in response to Miiquality was more like their second one, and said "Yeah, we're not gonna be able to get it in via a patch or anything, but we'll consider it for future games" there would have been no controversy at all. Instead, as history shows, Nintendo responded with a fairly stupid comment that makes me believe that nobody who is either proficient in english or is familar with culture in the United States is either part of their PR department, or had the day off when it was made.

While I agree they shouldn't have said anything, They are entierly right. It is a political and social thing, which is exactly why they didn't want anything to do with it.

If Nintendo included gay marriage in that or any other of their games, they would get just as much if not more crap for that decision as they are for having patched it out. Do you know why that is when so many other games have tried to tackle homosexuality for the sake of being inclusive? Well, those games also weren't made by the industry's equivalent of Disney. Nintendo, like Disney, wants to keep an 'all ages' image, that's also why they ban all religious images and themes in their games. It's not because they think religion is bad, it's because religion is surrounded by politics and social debacles. The point I'm trying to make is sadly, for many people in the 1st world, "for all ages" stillalso means the exclusion of gay marriage. Maybe you should fight the good fight over here instead because even Disney won't touch this with a 10ft pole. Don't get me wrong, I know Disney likes gay people, but you know what? We'll probably not see a Disney animated movie about a homosexual couple in our lifetimes. Even in America, a (now) largely homosexual accepting place, we try and keep homosexuality and other such things out of the "for all ages" entertainment. That's an ongoing political and social battle (yes, Nintendo was right about that) that seemingly has no end yet in sight. If we can't even fix that over here, how in the WORLD do you or anyone else expect to force a company in a largely homophobic culture (like japan) to etch the way for us?

While I agree with the overall message and I would like to see homosexual characters in Nintendo games one day, I think it's completely absurd to try and bully Nintendo into fighting for gay rights in children's entertainment when we can't even come close to winning that battle over here. It's also absurd to try and smear Nintendo for saying this fight is one of politics when it's one of the bigger political hot-buttons over here in the west and everyone knows it.

Zachary Amaranth:

bdcjacko:
Look, I'm all for gay marriage is games and real life. Just as long as we don't have gay divorce.

What about gay annulments?

Look, if they= gays get married, I just think they should have to put up with that mistake for life.

On the subject of boycotting things, I'm pretty sure at this point that I just can't bring myself to click another featured piece on the Escapist until they make one titled "We're Sorry That Our Coverage of Tomodachi Was So Terrible."

We've now had 2 news stories, a featured article, and a full Jimquisition entry claiming factually incorrect things about this game. They didn't patch out homosexuality, they patched out the game breaking.

And no, Jim, they weren't saying they excluded homosexual relationships to avoid social commentary. They were saying that they didn't exclude homosexual relationships to make social commentary. Plenty of people have made reasonable arguements that it was a stupid response to pretend that the exclusion of homosexuality isn't social commentary. You could have done that too. Instead you're pretending they were saying they didn't include homosexuality because that would be social commentary, and that didn't happen at all.

So basically, you took the trainwreck of lies going around this website and added another car to the pile. Congratulations

People sure do love to complain. Its a smart business decision glitch or no and I won't condemn them for it. I seriously doubt Nintendo has any sort of agenda beyond making the most money they can. Simply put there are a lot of parents out there who would not buy their kids a game if it had same sex relationships in it. Many of those parents probably are not even bigots they just don't feel like trying to explain to a 6 year old why two guys or two girls are getting married. If it was just a glitch though that was fixed its even more of a non-issue. There isn't really a history of gay bashing in Japan that I am aware of so they don't feel the need to be all double plus good, politically correct and inclusive about everything that ever has been or will be released. The people that live there don't feel the need to throw a hissy fit every time their certain demographic gets omitted from something. No just leave it to us over here in the western world to tell Nintendo how bigoted they are for fixing an unintended glitch in a children's game.

TLDR; Life isn't fair. Build a bridge and get over it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here