Jimquisition: Tomodachi Strife

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

Sticky:

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?

I never said anything was wrong with fixing a bug. I said that Nintendo's software skills seem pretty much rubbish to begin with. A way to be more professional would be to not write such awful code in the first place.

And no, "every game has bugs" is not an excuse - few games has bugs as cripplingly bad as this one is described. And no modern systems other than Nintendo's have such endemic file saving, data transfer and corruption problems as Nintendo's handhelds.

Honestly I feel that if Nintendo had just stuck with the "It was a side effect of a glitch that literally broke the game, it's too big to just patch in" stance, this episode wouldn't have been needed. Sure some people would have still been a bit stupid about it, but then they would've just been stupid, they wouldn't have had a valid point, now people have legitimate reason to say "The hell Nintendo?" and it's because Nintendo chose the worst possible defense for their actions. Honestly so many problems would be averted in this day and age if people just thought for 3 minutes before opening their mouths.

MarsAtlas:
You can have relationships in the game, and until Nintendo edited it out, these relationships could be same-sex. Citing bugs that affected the larger game - it wasn't supposed to be there in the first place - Nintendo patched gay marriage out of the Japanese version of Tomodachi Life. Nintendo [of] America made it quite that it had no intention of putting it back in for the game's western release. Since, shockingly, some gamers are actually gay and actually like being represented in games that put personalization first, a Miiquality petition was enacted to try to get Nintendo to change its mind. So far, so mildly controversial. And then Nintendo, itself, made things stupidly controversial."

You the player, could never have a same-sex relationship. So I really don't know how you can claim Jim is right. And setting one of the mii's as the incorrect gender to have one was never patched ((how could it be really)) so that would be wrong to.

Eve Charm:

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.

Other developers also being incompetent is not proof of Nintendo's competence.

Aardvaarkman:

Sticky:

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?

I never said anything was wrong with fixing a bug. I said that Nintendo's software skills seem pretty much rubbish to begin with. A way to be more professional would be to not write such awful code in the first place.

I genuinely can't tell if you, anonymous person on the internet. Are being serious here.

It sounds like you're blowing a couple of bugs out of proportion because you have one of the worst cases of confirmation bias I've ever seen.

Aardvaarkman:

And no, "every game has bugs" is not an excuse - few games has bugs as cripplingly bad as this one is described. And no modern systems other than Nintendo's have such endemic file saving, data transfer and corruption problems as Nintendo's handhelds.

Like this, did you ever play the N-Gage?

Or say, any of Ubisoft's handheld titles last generation?

You have no right to say that Nintendo is even a quarter of the incompetence of your average development team if you haven't. Those are some masterpieces in bad software design. Nintendo is pretty good considering that most of their games don't have a patch cycle unless strictly required.

Aardvaarkman:

Eve Charm:

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.

Other developers also being incompetent is not proof of Nintendo's competence.

You did say that "few games have bugs this crippingly bad"

When we can look at the industry

and see that's not true.

And also see that MANY games have bugs FAR WORSE than an instability when an odd Mii transfer was done in an unexpected way.

Aardvaarkman:

Eve Charm:

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.

Other developers also being incompetent is not proof of Nintendo's competence.

True but your setting the bar too high nowadays for a game to come out and not be full of game breaking bugs. At least nintendo's team bug came from gathering data from old, out of date technology. Least they aren't trying to lock their games behind drm or online only then screwing the online part at launch. I believe every major company has been guilty of this in the last 3 years.

Well... it's like this.

Tomodachi Life is rated "E" for "Mild Fantasy Violence, Comic Mischief".

Billy's mom gets Tomodachi Life for Billy.

Billy plays Tomodachi Life.

Billy shows his mom that he can make boys kiss in Tomodachi life;

Billy's mom takes his 3DS back to the store.

...

Now, it may well be that Billy's mom is a close-minded cultural throwback. It may well be that twenty years from now, every state in the United States will fully recognize gay marriage. I would personally be quite glad to see this. Trends seem to indicate that younger people are far more accepting of homosexuality than their elders, even among many communities one would tend to think less tolerant of such things, such as Evangelical Christians. It's quite entirely possible, and even likely, that fear and discomfort with having a gay friend, neighbor, teacher, etc. will one day be hard to contemplate.

We aren't there yet. As tempting as it is to believe that your particular pool is a microcosm of the greater world, as much as the Internet encourages us to believe that through the ease with which we find "our own", there are still a lot of people who cheer things like that doofus on Duck Dynasty.

I'm not saying that Sterling isn't right that Nintendo handled this badly. Or that saying "we're not going to engage in social commentary" isn't taking a kind of stance. Or even that, maybe, it wouldn't be a good thing overall to see gay marriage in Tomodachi Life.

But, don't suggest that it would be without consequence. Don't do it. It's not true. What goes for M-rated Skyrim's audience in a game full of shades-of-gray and bloodletting or even The Sims' "anything goes as you make videogame characters have threesomes with tv celebrities and aliens" atmosphere does not necessarily hold true for a family-friendly E-rated Nintendo game on the hardware they've worked the hardest (hello 2DS) to make child-friendly.

Having gay marriage in TL might well be the right thing to do. But it would cost them. Suggesting it would be a freebie is putting a thumb on the scale.

erbkaiser:
Oh yes Nintendo is horrible because as a Japanese company, it applies Japanese cultural norms to a game.

Ah, the Nintendo white-knighting continues. I'm rather tired of this particular line, so let's deal with it. They are not just a Japanese company. In fact, I believe the response that annoyed everyone came from Nintendo of America, which is most definitely not a Japanese company. They work in a global marketplace, same as anyone else, and the game is being localised for NA release, which is why gamers from NA and Europe asked them to make the change.

Are you still following along, or do you need help?

Houseman:

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

But nobody except you is using that logic.

The logic others are using is that characters already in the game are being artificially excluded from certain actions.

Houseman:

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.

WHAT!?

Those pronouns have nothing to do with straight or gay. The characters already have genders, so this would already be accounted for. Gay marriage doesn't change any of those things.

Houseman:

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.

So, who said that they had to allow adoption or gay couples with children? If the only option for children is reproduction, then that's consistent across gay and straight marriage.

It's weird that they wouldn't include it though, as gays aren't the only ones that would want to adopt. It's also weird if you can't have children without marriage. So, that's pretty dumb, but once again, not the issue that's being discussed here.

MarsAtlas:
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.

I will agree that some people accusing Jim of being misinformed are themselves misinformed, but you are in the same way misinformed.

They didn't patch out gay relationships, at all, ever, not even a little bit.

They patched out an error that broke the game. Not one that broke the game by making people gay, it just broke the game. I'm not entirely sure how people think one observes gay characters in the glitch when the glitch apparently "corrupted the save data and prevented people from progressing." You can't tell if the Miis are gay if your save is corrupted and you can't do anything.

What happened was they patched out a terrible, game breaking glitch. Then, unrelated, Japanese players started crossdressing characters to make it seem like they had gay Miis. Then, a Japanese site reported on these two seperate events in the same article. Finally, an english speaking person misinterpretted the artcle while translating it thinking that the glitch was what caused the gay marriage screenshots.

The glitch didn't cause gay characters. The glitch was completely unrelated. The homosexual options in the game, meaning crossdress a character to pretend or have nothing, have not changed at all since the games release. Not even a little bit.

Read http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/05/05/nintendo-on-gay-marriage-and-tomodachi-life

So, yes, Jim is misinformed here.

Eve Charm:
You the player, could never have a same-sex relationship. So I really don't know how you can claim Jim is right. And setting one of the mii's as the incorrect gender to have one was never patched ((how could it be really)) so that would be wrong to.

Yes, you could. They didn't patch out cross-dressing, they patched out an exploit where you could have to male miis marry each other because that bug caused a lot of errors with the game. You can still crossdress a Mii and pretend its a same-sex relationship. Those will just happen to have an M and an F with the M crossdressing if its a lesbian relationship and the F crossdressing if its a gay male relationship. What the bug took out was a status which officially was M - M relationship.

bdcjacko:

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.

Then I propose we allow people to marry more than one person as long as they're of the same sex. Aside from still having to deal with it, that really should piss off some Mormons.

tstorm823:
They didn't patch out gay relationships, at all, ever, not even a little bit.

Since you posted this while I myself was making a post, I point you to my previous one. The bug that damaged the game was in fact related to same-sex marriage.

Aardvaarkman:

But nobody except you is using that logic.

Jim Sterling seems to be.

The logic others are using is that characters already in the game are being artificially excluded from certain actions.

I disagree. but if you want to go down that route, there are dogs and cats in the game... Are they not being "artificially excluded from certain actions"? What do you count as "artificially excluded"? Surely they could have just taken the dog model and placed it on the altar instead of the mate of your choosing, couldn't they?

The characters already have genders, so this would already be accounted for.

You're right.

So, who said that they had to allow adoption or gay couples with children? If the only option for children is reproduction, then that's consistent across gay and straight marriage.

So then gay couples get to miss out on the chunk of the game? Okay then, if that's how you want it...

It's weird that they wouldn't include it though, as gays aren't the only ones that would want to adopt. It's also weird if you can't have children without marriage. So, that's pretty dumb, but once again, not the issue that's being discussed here.

Is it? Is it weird?

Or is it just a developer having a finite amount of time and money to spend on a game, and, as a result, having to make choices about what things they do or do not include?

And this includes "the default", as Jim says. If "The default" gets big enough, then that's all anyone with a finite amount of time and money can bear to do. A developer would spend the entire development process allowing people have the option to be foxes, or ships, or whatever anybody would ever want to be, and then you'd end up with Second Life, basically.

MarsAtlas:

bdcjacko:

Zachary Amaranth:

What about gay annulments?

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

Then I propose we allow people to marry more than one person as long as they're of the same sex. Aside from still having to deal with it, that really should piss off some Mormons.

I would like to add that the polygamous homosexual need to prove they are mormons first. The more arbitrary the law, the more correct it is.

The problem with the argument that Jim is making is that homosexuals represent an extremely tiny percentage of the population. What's more it's not something that is "generally accepted", it's a major political issue in the first world seeing divides of like 50% of the population, and something that is outright detested in the second and third world with the support of homosexuality being one of the things used to rally those people against the first world as being decadent and immoral, indeed one could argue it contributes to a lot of overall political tensions as a lot of countries want to engage in censorship of the media, internet, and other things in part because of this kind of thing and the idealogy the American media presents.

Trying to say that "gay rights" shouldn't be political is by definition a political statement, and a controversial one. Especially seeing as the entire gay rights movement started as saying that someone should not be arrested simply for leading an alternative lifestyle. The very term "alternative lifestyle" has fallen out of use right now, but it was a key element of the whole gay rights movement for a long time. Only some very extreme people were making arguments that gays should be basically inserted into all aspects of society and media, and presented as being around in equal number to heterosexuals and such when they aren't. The movement snowballed into this kind of thing, going to attacks on things like video games for treating an alternative lifestyle as one, and not feeling obligated to include it, when originally it was more based around the idea that what a couple of consenting adults do in their own bedroom is their own business. The whole argument that "it's not like anyone is going to get up in your face about it, if your not in their bedroom why do you care" more or less no longer applies. This is in part why the issue is increasingly political, and why you have a lot of people who were early gay rights supporters now embracing the other side. Even in the US, perhaps the most permissive nation on earth, there isn't real inertia for gay marriage, which is why you see it being passed someplace one day, and then banned another, in part because in order to pass a lot of these laws a political game needs to be played to bypass the normal checks and balances inherent in society to allow changes to laws without the necessary levels of societal support. If there was some trend towards majority or super-majority support you wouldn't see the issues you do now, because a tiny, fringe, minority of haters just couldn't accomplish this much.

What's more, one has to also look at video games in particular and the negative reaction the gay community is getting from it's own actions. Look at say "The Old Republic Online" as an example, a set of designers (Bioware) who showed that they had no problem developing gay and bi-sexual characters when they fit a given storyline, was brutally attacked for writing a game where they didn't insert any such characters and romance options as they didn't think it fit. The basic argument was one of an entitled minority. When Bioware eventually agreed to develop some, a promise it kept with it's first major expansion, the gay community then rallied screaming that it wasn't enough, making it clear (and some people even outright stating) that what they wanted was intrusive gay content, so if you walked onto your ship you'd have homosexuals trying to flirt with you and stuff, with the specific intention of annoying straights in order to make a statement. The clashes over this in and outside of the game have largely died down, but it kind of showed that this is a minority group that tends to escalate it's demands when you give them anything, which can be an issue when your dealing with sexual behavior that actually repels a good amount of the population who aren't wired that way (basically you might not care if two dudes want to get it on, but you don't want to have to watch them make out, or have some dude following you around, trying to get into your pants).

There is also the issue of course of international acceptance, a big question is of course whether a game like a life sim is being intended to be sold internationally and a lot of effort regionally editing it is undesired. Sure the first world might push for their gay relationship simulator being thrown in, but in other countries where such behavior is seriously looked down on or still outright illegal you have a problem. Especially if your heavily selling to various Asian countries who aren't always the most progressive and tolerant guys on the planet. While a nation like Australia might tolerate some easily bypassed filters (South Park's crying Koala) other nations might not be so accepting and it could hurt business relations. While it wasn't sexual I look towards some of the stories I've heard about WoW's release in China, where they have a prohibition against showing the dead/undead walking around, so they had to re-do the entire playable undead faction into something else (basically ugly humans) for a Chinese release which apparently too a lot of work, and lead to certain things playing out very differently since especially early on the major theme is fighting against undead and "The Lich King". Supposedly this also lead to them using less undead in their later expansions (which I haven't played as much) although they were still present as well, and the whole Pandaria thing was in part a compromise by throwing in some eastern (particularly Chinese) inspiration so it could be defended as "mythological" under Chinese law and see less censorship. How true all of this (especially the later parts) are is debatable, but I've run into a lot of references over the years. Surprisingly regional content requirements is something nobody bothers to consider when homosexuality in games come up, it's one case where the cosmopolitan tend to gain major cases of tunnel vision both in the actual numbers involved in their own country, and global attitudes outside of the first world countries the US most shares media coorespondance with.

That said, yes, Nintendo has committed yet another press flub, but at the same time I don't think they can be considered entirely wrong in making their statement about politics. Anyone who has clashed from either side of the gay rights equasion in the USA even and watched the laws waffle, should be painfully aware this is a political battleground even if people wish it wasn't one. Even if a gay-accepting super-majority appears in the first world (as opposed to being wishful thinking people hope will become a reality through claiming it is) it will still remain an international battleground and a factor in anyone wanting to sell a product outside of the most civilized and enlightened countries. Especially seeing as it's not like we're going to start invading nations because they are mean to gay people.

I'll also say that I think "alternative lifestyles" is a slippery slope especially when you start looking around globally. One group that outnumbers homosexuals vastly for example are Polygamists, which can become increasingly common outside of the first world. Even the US has had issues with Polygamist communes and the male children being forced out as soon as legally possible so the older men can monopolize all the girls. I don't know if this game already allows that, but to put things into perspective it could be argued that if your going to allow one alternative lifestyle, you have to allow all of them, especially more common ones, when looking at a global marketplace. Follow that train far enough and even if it's not polygamy and it's problems you will eventually wind up with something that will offend even the most tolerant person. Not an argument I expect to be popular here, but when looking at a product like this it does make a degree of sense to cater to the largest group of people (the supermajority) and pretty much try and omit everything that could cause a serious problem. In absolute terms it's not just gays getting the shaft, it's just that they represent a political flash point in the US and other first world nations. I mean in theory if such nations were more politically powerful in a global scale, you could potentially see some nation that allows and encourages polygamy and has a low age of consent argueing that it's bigoted to have a game based on western American/European standards where they can't say marry 12 year old girls, relegate them to house work once they get "too old" (18 or so) and then marry another one, as a few women's rights coalitions will point out garbage like that still happens throughout a surprising portion of the world, and would count as a valid lifestyle people would want to simulate.

Ahh well, I'm rambling. I'm not going to argue this in detail, I already know most people will disagree with me for one reason or another. I just think it's not that big a deal, and honestly this is probably the wrong place to be trying to draw a line if you support gay rights. It's an easy target from a certain point of view, but really if I was a gay rights supporter I'd be picking other battles, and working more towards trying to create that supermajority as an actual reality than fighting things like this that are likely to just solidify the divide and convince as many people to side against you as they will bring to your side. I'm kind of in the middle of the issue which makes me hated by both sides (strongly pro-gay and strongly anti-gay) so I get it from both ends, which is why I'm not going to bother to get into serious political arguments here again.

MarsAtlas:

Since you posted this while I myself was making a post, I point you to my previous one. The bug that damaged the game was in fact related to same-sex marriage.

IGN- "So it was actually two separate things that got lumped together into one piece of confusion that resulted in people not quite understanding what had gone on."

http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/05/05/nintendo-on-gay-marriage-and-tomodachi-life

Saying that the glitch and the gay relationships were unrelated.

Kotaku- "Update: In a comment released to MCVUK, Nintendo stated that there wasn't a bug that allowed same sex marriage. Rather, some fans had dressed female characters to look like male ones."

Saying that the glitch and the gay relationships were unrelated.

Would you like to contest my double sourced information?

MarsAtlas:

Eve Charm:
You the player, could never have a same-sex relationship. So I really don't know how you can claim Jim is right. And setting one of the mii's as the incorrect gender to have one was never patched ((how could it be really)) so that would be wrong to.

Yes, you could. They didn't patch out cross-dressing, they patched out an exploit where you could have to male miis marry each other because that bug caused a lot of errors with the game. You can still crossdress a Mii and pretend its a same-sex relationship. Those will just happen to have an M and an F with the M crossdressing if its a lesbian relationship and the F crossdressing if its a gay male relationship. What the bug took out was a status which officially was M - M relationship.

Nope incorrect, Two male mii's marrying each other, was what happened when a user would set one of the two mii's to female, either their own or the one they wanted to marry and cross dressing, Still in the game. The bug was again, when data was imported from the Wii or the old ds version, it would add those mii's to the 3ds game, while doing it, it caused a data leak, so when the game assigned the mii's into the game, it'd make them single, married, friends and what not, and setting them to married it could accidentally set two males or two females as married. Some players noticed this and thought it was cool, but it also crashed the game.

The player could never do this on their own, before or after patch, all the patch did was fix it from screwing up the data transfer that wouldn't allow the players to save their game anymore if that transfer glitch happened.

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2014/04/nintendo_provides_some_context_to_2013s_tomodachi_life_same_sex_marriage_controversy
((probably the only good news article on the whole story))

First, i disagree with his assessment of Nintendo's response. That when Nintendo responded and said they aren't trying to make social commentary. That interpretted them as saying allowing for gay marriage would be social commentary. When in fact i think they meant that when they omited same sex marriage they weren't trying to commentate on it. I think it is a case of people interpretting Nintendo's response in the worst way possible. Its typical people on the internet looking for reasons to be upset.

I think part of the reason for backlash is a disrespect for the game genre. Yeah, the AAA singleplayer games that don't include all sub sets is acceptable because it is ART and its about the developers' vision more then satisfying every individual, but in a life sim, the developer is racist if they don't. The sistine chapel isn't worse because it is a bunch. of white people. Art is Art and as long as the art isn't inherently hateful which omission of some minorities isn't, then the artists don't deserve this crap.

I think it is also disrespectful of Japanense culture. That the game was perfectly respectful in their culture. I don't want every Japanese piece of art to have to avoid being shown in the west inorder to avoid backlash. Being tolerant of other cultures goes well beyond being tolerant of people with other sexual preferences and even goes well past being tolerant of pieces of art that omit gay couples.

My undersanding is the game is about making babies.It is obvious that including gay couples would require another set of mechanics. While it would of been nice to have gay options, saying a game about making babies is discriminatory if it doesn't also have mechanics for gays to make babies is ludicrous.

atavax:
Snip

Welcome to the forums

You do bring up an excellent point: what about the Japanese viewpoint in this? Nintendo doesn't seem to really care about being the spearhead of gay rights movement in Japan, so why do people in the west feel that it is their job to be that way?

I'm sure no one would argue that it's Nintendo's duty to fight for the rights of the downtrodden whoever they may be on the basis that they are a company that sells video games for profit.

Silvershock:

erbkaiser:
Oh yes Nintendo is horrible because as a Japanese company, it applies Japanese cultural norms to a game.

Ah, the Nintendo white-knighting continues. I'm rather tired of this particular line, so let's deal with it. They are not just a Japanese company. In fact, I believe the response that annoyed everyone came from Nintendo of America, which is most definitely not a Japanese company. They work in a global marketplace, same as anyone else, and the game is being localised for NA release, which is why gamers from NA and Europe asked them to make the change.

Are you still following along, or do you need help?

The game was originally made for the japanese audience and Nintendo decided to port it for extra revenue.Asking that they alter the game to suit the needs of another audience reeks of self centeredness.I don't see people from other countries demanding features from western games aside from censhorship,so this is just the case of us Americans thinking the wrold revolves around us once again.

Silvershock:

erbkaiser:
Oh yes Nintendo is horrible because as a Japanese company, it applies Japanese cultural norms to a game.

Ah, the Nintendo white-knighting continues. I'm rather tired of this particular line, so let's deal with it. They are not just a Japanese company. In fact, I believe the response that annoyed everyone came from Nintendo of America, which is most definitely not a Japanese company. They work in a global marketplace, same as anyone else, and the game is being localised for NA release, which is why gamers from NA and Europe asked them to make the change.

Are you still following along, or do you need help?

It's not the job of localization to add features, that's the job of the original developers at NoJ. And the developers at NoJ have no incentive to modify the design document after the main game has already gone gold. It makes no business sense or practical sense to make it this way and is completely infeasible by design standards. For whatever reason, financial or practical, they decided not to pursue making it a feature. This is also likely because games about heterosexual couples come out here in the west all of the time, I can find several about them just looking at a list of recently released games, and no one raises a fit about it except this one time.

Still following along, or do you need help?

Therumancer:
The problem with the argument that Jim is making is that homosexuals represent an extremely tiny percentage of the population.

Why should they be given fewer options because of this?

Therumancer:
What's more it's not something that is "generally accepted", it's a major political issue

I'm really hoping you're not saying we should turn our backs on equal treatment in order to placate people.

Therumancer:
Trying to say that "gay rights" shouldn't be political is by definition a political statement, and a controversial one. Especially seeing as the entire gay rights movement started as saying that someone should not be arrested simply for leading an alternative lifestyle. The very term "alternative lifestyle" has fallen out of use right now, but it was a key element of the whole gay rights movement for a long time. Only some very extreme people were making arguments that gays should be basically inserted into all aspects of society and media, and presented as being around in equal number to heterosexuals and such when they aren't.

I have never seen an argument that gay people should be shown in "equal number", and I'm pretty well informed on this subject. I'm pretty certain that's just an imaginary argument, invented by people who want to smear the cause for gay representation.

Therumancer:

What's more, one has to also look at video games in particular and the negative reaction the gay community is getting from it's own actions. Look at say "The Old Republic Online" as an example, a set of designers (Bioware) who showed that they had no problem developing gay and bi-sexual characters when they fit a given storyline, was brutally attacked for writing a game where they didn't insert any such characters and romance options as they didn't think it fit. The basic argument was one of an entitled minority. When Bioware eventually agreed to develop some, a promise it kept with it's first major expansion, the gay community then rallied screaming that it wasn't enough, making it clear (and some people even outright stating) that what they wanted was intrusive gay content, so if you walked onto your ship you'd have homosexuals trying to flirt with you and stuff, with the specific intention of annoying straights in order to make a statement. The clashes over this in and outside of the game have largely died down, but it kind of showed that this is a minority group that tends to escalate it's demands when you give them anything, which can be an issue when your dealing with sexual behavior that actually repels a good amount of the population who aren't wired that way (basically you might not care if two dudes want to get it on, but you don't want to have to watch them make out, or have some dude following you around, trying to get into your pants).

May I just ask-- do you consider it "intrusive straight content" when a straight character flirts with your character in a game, or does the sexuality of it simply not enter into it when it's straight?

Therumancer:

I'll also say that I think "alternative lifestyles" is a slippery slope especially when you start looking around globally. One group that outnumbers homosexuals vastly for example are Polygamists, which can become increasingly common outside of the first world. Even the US has had issues with Polygamist communes and the male children being forced out as soon as legally possible so the older men can monopolize all the girls. I don't know if this game already allows that, but to put things into perspective it could be argued that if your going to allow one alternative lifestyle, you have to allow all of them, especially more common ones, when looking at a global marketplace. Follow that train far enough and even if it's not polygamy and it's problems you will eventually wind up with something that will offend even the most tolerant person.

You seriously implied that acceptance of homosexuality may lead to acceptance of polygamists who force male children out?

You are deliberately associating me-- and anyone else who loves the same gender, through no choice of their own-- with those actions. You cannot just say something so incredibly hurtful, and personal, and then say you're not going to "get into" it.

Houseman:

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".

Who the hell cares about the people in Tumblr. They're an enclosed group feeding off each other and pushing things way too far. It's one thing to want something it's another to bring pretend to the point of civil liberties and admonish people for not sharing in the same fantasy you want to be in. Homosexuality doesn't qualify like that. They don't want to be gay they are gay. They don't want to be in relationships with the same sex they are in loving relationships. Equating the two is a falicy and a straw man. You want people to say that the people on Tumblr are coo coo bananas? Sure, the one's who think everyone should drop everything they are doing and pretend someone is a squid so they can feel special is a totally mental now stop equating it with real civil rights issues.

the hidden eagle:
The game was originally made for the japanese audience and Nintendo decided to port it for extra revenue.Asking that they alter the game to suit the needs of another audience reeks of self centeredness.I don't see people from other countries demanding features from western games aside from censhorship,so this is just the case of us Americans thinking the wrold revolves around us once again.

If Japanese companies want to sell something to American (or Western in general) consumers, then their world damn well better revolve around those customers. This is the basic principle of business: The customer is always right as he is king. I hate how you get called "entitled" (or some other less friendly, but no less stupid, terms), by fellow consumers no less, for being critical of companies or even *gasp* actually refraining from purchasing their crap entirely.

Just because the lords of glorious Nippon deign to grant us gaijin the right to purchase their games, doesn't mean we have to swallow whatever archaic regressive crap they try to push.

Okay, I'm usually on the same page as you on these issues, Jim, but after watching this video, I have to ask the question: What the fuck are you talking about? Setting aside the issue of (in my opinion) Nintendo not saying what you implied that they said, how can you reasonably claim that including something that is a current social hot topic is not a socially political comment while excluding the same automatically is? Whether positive or negative, publicly taking a stance on gay marriage at this time(and especially in Japan where there is no clear majority of support for it) is absolutely making a political comment, as there is a lot of politics involved in the issue right now(as you yourself mentioned later in the video).

Actively taking a stance on pro-blacks or pro-women's rights isn't a political issue because the laws involving those topics are well established and long standing, so taking a negative stance on that is only bigoted, not politically controversial. The laws involving gay marriage are currently in flux, so taking a negative or positive stance on that is political(though being negative is no less bigoted).

On the other hand, I also don't believe that one is making a socially political comment either by including or excluding unless one intends to. Not everyone cares about social politics, and despite what some of the more abrasive members of out community might claim, you don't fall into the "against" column by default if you don't proudly proclaim that you are "for." You aren't part of the problem simply by not actively trying to be part of the solution. The only way to be part of the problem is by actively campaigning against gay marriage.

And that isn't what's going on here. Nintendo is a Japanese company. There is no gay marriage in Japan, no laws concerning property distribution for gay couples, and no great majority of Japanese citizens campaigning for a change in that regard. When a company from such a background says that they had no intentions of making socially political commentary through their games, I believe them, and I can't see any way to claim otherwise without coming off as a demagogue.

It's important to remember that there is a difference between you inferring something and them implying it. Intent matters, and trying to put words into someone's mouth to further your own political agenda is a bad, bad thing regardless of how benign the agenda itself is. It's the difference between your usual episodes, which are pointed commentary calling out the bullshit that people in the industry try to get away with, and this one, which comes off like a feminazi's blog reading rape intent in every word a man says or writes.

Remember: just because you are offended does not mean that they were offensive.

Jasper van Heycop:

the hidden eagle:
The game was originally made for the japanese audience and Nintendo decided to port it for extra revenue.Asking that they alter the game to suit the needs of another audience reeks of self centeredness.I don't see people from other countries demanding features from western games aside from censhorship,so this is just the case of us Americans thinking the wrold revolves around us once again.

If Japanese companies want to sell something to American (or Western in general) consumers, then their world damn well better revolve around those customers. This is the basic principle of business: The customer is always right as he is king. I hate how you get called "entitled" (or some other less friendly, but no less stupid, terms), by fellow consumers no less, for being critical of companies or even *gasp* actually refrain from purchasing their crap entirely.

Just because the lords of glorious Nippon deign to grant us gaijin the right to purchase their games, doesn't mean we have to swallow whatever archaic regressive crap they try to push.

I'm sorry, but that is so much bullshit, and it's that sort of thinking that ruined Squeenix until they made Bravely Default and realized how much bullshit it is. You cannot compare a work of art, be it a game, book, movie, etc, to a banal retail slogan. Granted, I wouldn't compare this Tomadachi thing to a well written novel or anything, but trying to cater to the largest audience possible is one of the worst trends in big media right now. A developer is under no obligation to make a game that caters to your tastes, and you are under no obligation to buy a game you don't like. Learn to love the niche, for it is your friend. Better to have games you love and loathe than a market full of "meh."

Japanese developers catering to western markets is the worst thing to happen to Japanese games.

To me this situation seems comparable of accusing eastern developers of pedophilia for the sexualization of girls that appear to be about 10 years old in many eastern videogames. First, the lack of homosexuals wasn't inherently hateful, 2nd, their game is perfectly acceptable in the society that the developers were living in and where the original market for the game was. If you aren't comfortable playing a game that doesn't allow homosexual options, simply avoid the game like people that aren't comfortable with sexualized 10 year old girls avoid games with them in it. Calling out the developers in a foreign culture for homophobia because of the lack of homosexual relationships seems as arrogant as calling out eastern devs for pedophilia for the presence of sexy 10 year old girls. Why as a culture should we let sexy 10 year old girls slide but not the lack of same sex couples? As long as they aren't preaching hatred, intolerance, or violence (which is better then what some american developers can claim) let them be, imo. I mean, really? Of all the violent shit that is perfectly acceptable in videogames, the lack of same sex marriage isn't?

Loki_The_Good:

Who the hell cares about the people in Tumblr. They're an enclosed group feeding off each other and pushing things way too far.

Funny, if you said the same thing about homosexuals, you'd be called all sorts of nasty things.

So how isn't this a double standard?

It's one thing to want something it's another to bring pretend to the point of civil liberties and admonish people for not sharing in the same fantasy you want to be in. Homosexuality doesn't qualify like that. They don't want to be gay they are gay.

Tumblrites might say the same thing about how they had no choice to be born as a fox, a whomp from Mario, or a 16-bit microprocessor.

They don't want to be in relationships with the same sex they are in loving relationships. Equating the two is a falicy and a straw man. You want people to say that the people on Tumblr are coo coo bananas? Sure, the one's who think everyone should drop everything they are doing and pretend someone is a squid so they can feel special is a totally mental now stop equating it with real civil rights issues.

"How dare you not call "a fox trapped in a man's body" a "real civil right issue!""

Jasper van Heycop:

the hidden eagle:
The game was originally made for the japanese audience and Nintendo decided to port it for extra revenue.Asking that they alter the game to suit the needs of another audience reeks of self centeredness.I don't see people from other countries demanding features from western games aside from censhorship,so this is just the case of us Americans thinking the wrold revolves around us once again.

If Japanese companies want to sell something to American (or Western in general) consumers, then their world damn well better revolve around those customers. This is the basic principle of business: The customer is always right as he is king. I hate how you get called "entitled" (or some other less friendly, but no less stupid, terms), by fellow consumers no less, for being critical of companies or even *gasp* actually refraining from purchasing their crap entirely.

Just because the lords of glorious Nippon deign to grant us gaijin the right to purchase their games, doesn't mean we have to swallow whatever archaic regressive crap they try to push.

1. People asked for this game that came out last year in only japan and wanting them to put in something that never really existed in the game is basically asking them to move a mountain.
2. Going by state and country legislation, They ARE catering to AMERICA. And that's not even factoring in the causal and young crowd this is targeted to, not the hip generation that contain the people perfectly fine with loving whoever you want to love. So be more upset it isn't the normal in your country first before your upset it isn't normal in some other countries video game.
3. Last maybe the issue is to mature for a group of people willing to go off on a SJW tirade then bother to check the facts.

themilo504:

erbkaiser:
Oh yes Nintendo is horrible because as a Japanese company, it applies Japanese cultural norms to a game.

Nintendo is of course also "racist" against Muslims, since this game does not allow marriages with little children (as the Prophet with Aisha), or plural marriages (a basic islamic right).

The western release could have easily included gay marriage as a feature.

Possibly yes, but probably no. Do you have any idea how much work what you might consider a "minor" feature can take to implement? How much coding is involved, how many bugs could result? Unless the game was coded with the intention of adding such features from the start, adding something as seemingly simple as your suggestion could take a lot of time and effort, more so than what usually goes into localizing an already existing game. This is usually only done when a developer is required to censor a game by another country's law, not to broaden a game beyond its original intent.

Eve Charm:

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.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

I didn't see anyone mention this but i certainly didn't read all the comments but whatever.

The bug that allowed for male/male marriage just tagged a male character as female randomly, even if they could have left it in it would not have been a good idea since you can't control it. Also a tagged character would only be able to marry other male characters, basically meaning your character would randomly be made gay and all other males would be gay only for him. As a completed project adding in gay characters is unrealistic without a massive overhaul, but doing it from the ground up it would have been minor in the grand scale of things. But this also means the positive aspect of the bug can be recreated exactly as it was by making a female character with male ascetics. The most you can say Nintendo did is remove the uncontrollable element of it.

Aardvaarkman:

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.

Does that excuse the behavior of people that claim to be righter and smarter than the people you put down? As an isolated indecent, I get you, but how many mass internet shamings have come down in the last 6 months alone every time someone we thought was cool says something we don't approve of?

BreakfastMan:

Eve Charm:

Scrumpmonkey:

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.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

If you don't care that regardless of the genders of the character, one character is going to play the male role, and one is going to play the female role in events like marriage and child birth and so on, your asking for a whole lot of work, that can screw up in a whole lot of places, that even working PERFECTLY, will be no better then just setting a character to the other sex and cross dressing him or her, something people have already been doing in the game. The best case scenario for that outcome is already doable in game effortlessly.

Draconalis:

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.

Not really funny so much as demonstrative of why Japan is behind some countries on the gay marriage issue. It all comes down to one word: face. Japan, like many Asian countries, is a nation of tradition. They have a way of doing things, and they'll keep doing it that way because that's the way they do things. The only way to break them out of tradition is to embarrass them. They'll do a lot to save face. They reformed divorce law because they were embarrassed at how much higher their divorce rate was than in western nations(and they went overboard; if a couple can't agree to terms it can take up to 20 years to finalize a divorce in court). I'm betting that Japan will follow the west when it comes to gay marriage as well, but only after the western nations themselves have figured it out. It's not like gay marriage is universally legalized yet, after all.

Basically, don't expect Japan to be socially progressive.

 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