• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Reggie:Making politicl statemnts are for other people todo, we want people tohave fun

Ugh, terrible answer.

I'm not sure I understand this response.

I 100% believe that video games can and should engage on a cultural and political level whenever they so choose

However, are you suggesting that there is some sort of moral imperative for them to do so? I certainly disagree with that. If Nintendo or anyone else doesn't want to make a political statement, why should you compel them to do so? What's wrong with acknowledging that others can do it, but you won't?
 

WonderzL

Banned
I'm not sure I understand this response.

I 100% believe that video games can and should engage on a cultural and political level whenever they so choose

However, are you suggesting that there is some sort of moral imperative for them to do so? I certainly disagree with that. If Nintendo or anyone else doesn't want to make a political statement, why should you compel them to do so? What's wrong with acknowledging that others can do it, but you won't?

because that's a political statement in itself
 

chadtwo

Member
I don't even know what this have to do with my initial points.

What I said is that by refusing to take an explicit political viewpoint in a game, Nintendo maximizes the happiness of those who play the game by avoiding the risk of alienating people who disagree with its political message. That's why Reggie specified that he wants people to have fun.

You chose to interpret my use of the word "happy" as referring to the general human condition. I'm telling you that that is wrong and silly, and you shouldn't expect all games to satisfy human happiness in the broad sense by making direct political appeals the oppressed.

What don't you get?
 
In the whole intent vs interpretation game, the one thing I learned that stuck with me is that your personal interpretation isn't paramount to other interpretations or the creator's intent.
 

Toad.T

Banned
No it's not. Art is, in simplest terms, an expression of creativity.

Expressions require some thought though. Creativity does as well. Whether you notice it or not, your beliefs, values and ideas seep into your thoughts, which seeps into your actions.

Even if you painted a crude stick figure near a house on a sunny day, it shows that you value those aspects of life (Shelter, Enviroment, humanity) because you chose to draw that over something that you may not want to draw.
 

brian!

Member
Dunno how anyone can interpret his statements or non-action in general as apolitical but at the same time dunno how anyone can expect a listed company to give a shit about anything besides shareholders
 
People getting angry over this are crazy. It's not like Reggie was even asked about his own games or anything, he was asked about the Far Cry 5 controversy - a game that isn't even on his system. Why would he care or comment about that at all?
 

Not

Banned
Even Nazis!

Actually, if you took out all the naive racist misogynists buying Nintendo games, it would more than likely hurt them

Then again, there's that Modern Warfare 2 boycott pic so they'd probably be fine.
 
Princess Peach wears a big fluffy pink dress, Mario wears a pair of overalls. The last sentence is a piece of commentary on the world even if you don't believe it to be so. It's politics by portrayal.

What commentary is it making? I'd be interesting in hearing your commentary, because Mario's actual design was pretty much the result of coincidences and tech limitations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario#Concept_and_creation

Originally, Miyamoto wanted to create a video game that used the characters Popeye, Bluto, and Olive Oyl. At the time, however, Miyamoto was unable to acquire a license to use the characters (and would not until 1982 with Popeye), so he ended up making an unnamed player character, Donkey Kong, and Lady (later known as Pauline).

Since Donkey Kong was set on a construction site, Mario was made into a carpenter. When he appeared again in Mario Bros., it was decided he should be a plumber, since a lot of the game is played in underground settings. Mario's character design, particularly his large nose, draws on western influences; once he became a plumber, Miyamoto decided to "put him in New York" and make him Italian,[10] lightheartedly attributing Mario's nationality to his mustache. Other sources have Mario's profession chosen to be carpenter in an effort to depict the character as an ordinary hard worker, and make it easier for players to identify with him. After a colleague suggested that Mario more closely resembled a plumber, Miyamoto changed Mario's profession accordingly and developed Mario Bros, featuring the character in the sewers of New York City.

Due to the graphical limitations of arcade hardware at the time, Miyamoto clothed the character in red overalls and a blue shirt to contrast against each other and the background. A red cap was added to let Miyamoto avoid drawing the character's hairstyle, forehead, and eyebrows, as well as to circumvent the issue of animating his hair as he jumped. To make him appear human onscreen despite his small size, Mario was given distinct features, prominently a large nose and a mustache, which avoided the need to draw a mouth and facial expressions on the small onscreen character.[14]
 

redcrayon

Member
I'm not really sure why Reggie was asked that in the first place- were there not enough senior Ubisoft execs to pitch it to instead?

Of all the major publishers to ask, Nintendo is the one with the least interest in narrative pushing controversial or political subject matter beyond broad themes of friendship and family. It's like asking Pixar for their opinion on (acclaimed horror film with commentary on US race relations from earlier this year) Get Out when there's half a dozen other directors in the room more qualified to give an interesting answer.
 

Bronetta

Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
Every piece of art that replicates aspects of our world is making either an implicit or explicit commentary on our world, and as such is political.

Comments like Reggie's are frustrating because they play into what I believe most gamers view on games to be. Games are not political while obeying/portraying societal norms.

For example: An implied Mario and Princess Peach romantic relationship is completely fine and non-political, however implying a Mario and another main character romantic relationship would be seen as being political by a lot of people.

This is frustrating because it means that if you're a person of colour or a gay person or a transexual person, then the chances of a meaningful portrayal in a meaningful Nintendo game are slim to none, simply because people view your mere presence as political, when the presence of Mario or Princess peach is just as political.

Nintendo don't and shouldn't make "political" games, right?

This doesn't just extend to inclusion of people, it also goes all the way into behaviour. When any behaviour outside of hetronormative terms is seen as being outside of the norm and so "political" it greatly restricts the type of things that can be seen in games.

Princess Peach wears a big fluffy pink dress, Mario wears a pair of overalls. The last sentence is a piece of commentary on the world even if you don't believe it to be so. It's politics by portrayal.

Nintendo can make whatever games they want, they owe no one anything, but saying that there's nothing political in their games is disingenuous. What they should really say is that they don't want to use their games to challenge mainstream culture and ideas. Which again is fine.

I just don't like Nintendo contributing to a video game culture that compares the portrayal of anything out of the norm to being preached to, or having politics shoved down their throat.

A lot of so called "non-political" games are political, you just don't see it as that because it upholds and supports parts of your world that you view to be normal.

What if you are interpreting everything as political and it wasnt the artist's intent? What if an artist wants you to appreciate and enjoy the art for what it is without some meta social commentary everytime?


In the whole intent vs interpretation game, the one thing I learned that stuck with me is that your personal interpretation isn't paramount to other interpretations or the creator's intent.

What this person said.
 
because that's a political statement in itself

And what statement is that? What are you reading from it?

Because while we're all free to apply whatever political ideology we so choose to the statements or to Nintendo's games, that doesn't mean we can attribute their intent. Unless someone has found some evidence as to what their intent is, but I'm not seeing it here.
 
I just don't like Nintendo contributing to a video game culture that compares the portrayal of anything out of the norm to being preached to, or having politics shoved down their throat.

There is a difference between a game being political by nature of relationships and portrayals being political (or at least ideological anyway) and making a game trying to send a specific message. Mario games are not trying to say anything about society. Xenoblade games are for instance, making very deliberate statements.

Nintendo does engage in making games sending messages. But Reggie aint gonna come out here and say yes or no when Nintendo's fame comes from making games about jumping on platforms, racing karts and shooting ink.

Some of yall really reading too deeply into this. There is not enough words in his statements to formulate a deep stance here. Which is the point of a PR person. He dodged the question perfectly because his company really does not give a shit about commenting on another company's (another partner actually) games.

Its cool if you wanna dog him for the none answer but he hasn't said anything in that statement.
 

Ron Mexico

Member
It's a fun read to look at Reggie the face of Nintendo vs. Reggie the PR guy.

He might be infuriating to some (and looking at some of the other Nintendo threads he absolutely is), but the man has a knack, a gift, for what he is being paid to do.

Reggie could walk into the overwhelming majority of PR/Business Development departments in the world and be successful.

Sometimes I think the nature of the business is lost in here.
 
Nintendo games haven't been very diverse historically, so I can see why they would want to try and just remove themselves from the conversation entirely.
 

Servbot24

Banned
I agree that games like Yoshi and Kirby should not have political messages. However there is plenty of room for it in other games, RPGs being the most obvious.

IMO anyone who gasps and reels back when a game has "Oh no, a political position!" is just insecure. In life people have beliefs, and we hopefully try to understand each other, or sometimes oppose each other. Art should be open to reflecting that.
 
And that is why I will never really care much for Nintendo games. The don't even dare to have any sort of message other than childish fun.

You don't care about Nintendo games because you don't want to. Nintendo isn't some hivemind. They're made up of dozens of different developers with their own thoughts and philosophies on games. And Reggie sure as fuck doesn't represent them. He's literally just a figurehead

Nintendo games haven't been very diverse historically, so I can see why they would want to try and just remove themselves from the conversation entirely.

Except that's not what they're doing, and people who say this seem to be actively ignoring Nintendo games. Pretty much EVERY game they've been releasing, a few long established series aside, have made huge strides in diversity. Hell, Sushi Striker has black characters in it. Every Pokemon, FE, and game with customization options actually has a decent variety of skin ton. Gender options are the norm for anything that isn't Zelda, too
 

MoogleMan

Member
Absolute dogshit. "We just want people to have fun! Keep politics out of video games!" is such a non-answer.

How so?

I play video games to escape reality, and lo and behold, to have fun. I prefer politics to not be part of my fun.
 

Bronetta

Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
It's a fun read to look at Reggie the face of Nintendo vs. Reggie the PR guy.

He might be infuriating to some (and looking at some of the other Nintendo threads he absolutely is), but the man has a knack, a gift, for what he is being paid to do.

Reggie could walk into the overwhelming majority of PR/Business Development departments in the world and be successful.

Sometimes I think the nature of the business is lost in here.


Like I said earlier people who work in marketing/PR/communications admire Reggie's tenacity. The mans a master of his craft.
 
Why is this even a thread? Nintendo isn't going to polarize its audience, and he's not going to give his stance for Nintendo, he'd be jobless.
 
Man, there are so many legitimate things to give Nintendo flack for. This ain't one of them. I think people just want everything to be political to have something to argue about.
Yea this thread is hilarious.

Why does everything have to be political? What happened to just good clean fun without some underlying statement? FFS

I play Mario and Zelda to jump on things in a colorful world and fight cool bosses in cool dungeons, not because I want some social commentary about Trump's presidency.
 
you need to google nintendo studios before claiming stupid shit like nintendo making only mario games

I don't recall making that claim. I do recall using Mario as an example.

They aren't interested in making anything with an intentional political lean. Therefore, they won't have an answer about an intentional political lean, because there isn't one.

Their "politics" is "We wanna avoid people getting angry with us". Sure, you can take "Oh well Mario's not gay so obviously they hate gay people", but the truth of the matter is that putting a gay character in a game gets you attention for it, some of it negative, some of it positive, but ultimately it's a liability. Does that mean that Nintendo doesn't like homosexuality, or that they consider it a sin, or any of that nonsense? No, it means they don't want to open that can of worms either way. And doing that, ultimately, means going with the "normal" answer, whatever that may be.
 
What's "childish" about fun?

If children enjoy it then it is childish fun. That doesn't mean adults can't also have fun with it. I just desire more than 'fun'.

You don't care about Nintendo games because you don't want to. Nintendo isn't some hivemind. They're made up of dozens of different developers with their own thoughts and philosophies on games. And Reggie sure as fuck doesn't represent them. He's literally just a figurehead

What Nintendo game has any sort of strong philosophical message or output?
 
What Nintendo game has any sort of strong philosophical message or output?

mother-3_large.png

The_Legend_of_Zelda_-_Majora%27s_Mask_Box_Art.jpg
 

T.O.P

Banned
Some people see the number 23 everywhere they look, others look for political messages in games and whether they're making a statement. I'm just here to enjoy games and have fun while doing it. That's all.
Ain't nothing wrong with that. That's definitely part of the reason why I'm way more interested in Nintendo's stuff these days than any of the typical AAA shlock.

Both of these, Nintendo is becoming (once again) my to go company for pure gaming bliss

And that is why I will never really care much for Nintendo games. The don't even dare to have any sort of message other than childish fun.

:lol
 
Are people here saying that is a moral imperative for every creator to actively insert political messages into everything they create?

Reggie isn't saying that games can't be political, he isn't even saying you shouldn't interpret their games politically. He's just saying that Nintendo doesn't actively try to put political themes and messages in their game. Which, this being Nintendo, is about the most unsurprising thing that could be said.
 

udivision

Member
However, are you suggesting that there is some sort of moral imperative for them to do so?

I think that's the case here. The election of Trump was such a shocking, ridiculous and frightening thing that people feel it needs to be opposed whenever it can. People are using that to justify, well, all manner of acts, and they feel that simply being "non-political" is incredibly offensive when being partisan is the only way.
 

chadtwo

Member
That's implying that if you disagree with something you can't enjoy it. Also political statements aren't on a conservative/liberal binary.

Well, of course you can enjoy things you disagree with. The point is that you're far less likely to, and many people flat-out don't.
 
The Inklings in Splatoon exist because humans went extinct due to rising sea levels. The scrolls in the single player campaign explicitly put the blame on human politicians creating policy counter to all scientific data. Can't imagine a more political statement than that.
 
Top Bottom