There's been a lot of them unfortunately, and warning them seems to make no difference.
Casualties are mounting up in this thread.
-
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.
#Miiquality | Bringing same-sex relationships to Nintendo's Tomodachi series
- Thread starter Tyeforce
- Start date
There's been a lot of them unfortunately, and warning them seems to make no difference.
Casualties are mounting up in this thread.
Man, it's hard to add much to this. It's completely perfect.
The neutral position is that you don't mention relationships. If you mention straight relationships, then you're already not neutral. It's really that simple.
Also, bit late to this thread, but I'm astounded at how awful Nintendo's PR response to this has been. It's catastrophic.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
And why rational people would care about crazy religious folk opinion?, and why a company like Nintendo wouldn't use their PR firm to stop any malicious fire?
I don't think the ABC had any problems when they are airing Modern Family...
It would have been way better if they said something like "It's too late to make the changes in the code right now, but we'll look into it in the future" rather that they aren't making a "social statement" when the exclusion of gay marriage in a game that allows heterosexual marriage is an option.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Is it possible that rather than blowing this out of proportion, other people simply feel it's more important than you do because they are impacted more by it than you are? It is itself a position of privilege to just say "Well, there's an objective importance to everything, this thing is not very important, so people who feel it is are blowing it out of proportion." There are probably things that are more important to you and less important to me, or vice versa. Part of empathy and sort of treating people with dignity and respect is actually recognizing how different people can have different priorities and make different decisions, and trying to build a world that works together to respect each other rather than sort of imposing on others a hierarchy of what's important.
Like, I have a friend with arthritis. She's not blowing it out of proportion when she fundraises for arthritis. There are lots of illnesses that affect more people more severely. It's not one of my top ten medical research priorities. But she is affected by it. And when she says she's affected by it, if other people are too or other people are moved by the way it affects her, that's an organic response to a problem. People are treating it exactly in proportion to how important they feel it is.
Is something--anything--important to you? I mean, if the answer is no and you're just a cynic across the board, or if you are lucky enough to have a life unencumbered by any obstacle out there in the world, then I guess we have no common ground with which to talk. But if you've ever been affected by an unfair policy, if you've ever been hurt by an unfair system, if you've ever had someone you love hurt or lost to a problem no one is paying attention to, do you think it would be right for people to remind you that you're blowing it out of proportion?
For a gay person, their orientation is a part of their identity. Every day they are bombarded with legal restrictions, social restrictions, and loud voices that try to stop them from having the dignity they deserve. The OP wants to quietly love his partner. Absolutely no one is saying marriage equality in Tomodachi Life is the single most significant issue of our era. They're saying it's one of a continuum of ways in which LBGT people are demeaned or feel demeaned in their daily life. And pointing out that we're a society that rarely takes the time to stop and consider the ways in which we demean others has the intention to engender empathy and build a better, kinder world. Standing against such a benign objective, whether by opposing it or just by rolling your eyes and dropping in jaded potshots, seems like blowing things out of proportion to me.
bluepolicebox
Member
Why can't we do both? That route to acceptance has more than one stop. Sometimes these "small battles" make a big difference. It's one more place where people can feel equal and represented. I understand why video games or television shows or movies might not seem to matter to people but I still remember the feeling I got as a kid when I got my first doll that looked like me or when Disney finally made a movie with a character of my ethnicity. They were little things that meant a whole lot to me.
I don't like seeing adult players made to feel excluded and I really don't like thinking about young players who may question why their parents aren't equally represented. Yes, there's a large battle being fought but that doesn't make these smaller ones meaningless. Baby steps are still steps.
vinnygambini
Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
Stumpokapow, your posts are always a joy to read, your contribution is always appreciated.
If Tomodachi Life were to allow same-sex relationships, the ESRB rating would differ. As such, how could Nintendo reach their targeted audiences (children in elementary school) without having a rated T marker is one of the questions I am asking myself?
Would a patch including sames-sex relationships change the ESRB rating while not included on the cart?
If Tomodachi Life were to allow same-sex relationships, the ESRB rating would differ. As such, how could Nintendo reach their targeted audiences (children in elementary school) without having a rated T marker is one of the questions I am asking myself?
Would a patch including sames-sex relationships change the ESRB rating while not included on the cart?
I don't mean to say you can't do both, continue this campaign and hopefully Nintendo will add it, it's worth doing it for the reasons you state alone. I just don't want people throwing all their emotion behind this as if it would change anything - changing the views of 'traditional' marriage is worth that emotion.
I guess seeing people get so emotional over this has just bothered me knowing that I feel that these voices are never there when I need them in the real world debate of gay marriage, but of course you are... at least on GAF.
I think the social power of the religious right is often overstated, especially on the gay marriage issue.
For example, when Disney Channel featured a girl with two moms on "Good Luck Charlie", I don't think that the boycott by One Million Moms had any meaningful effect.
The ball is rolling on acceptance for gay rights in the US, and it's more damaging to Nintendo to be on the losing side of that debate than not.
No it wouldn't.
If it did it would be time to burn the ESRB to the fucking ground (metaphorically, obvs).
It doesn't appear so:
http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.jsp
There's only a mention of sexuality in regard to talking about sex.
lol if this was allowed, Nintendo would be voted runner up for one of the worst companies because people would say the game influenced their kid to be gay/ more tease / more problems more controversy.
anyway, you guys should know, majority of parents ( which nintendo's core focus is on ) do not want them to experience gay stuff.
this movement is going to bite nintendo back TWICE as hard if they allow it.
anyway, you guys should know, majority of parents ( which nintendo's core focus is on ) do not want them to experience gay stuff.
this movement is going to bite nintendo back TWICE as hard if they allow it.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I agree that this a good topic and I really like Stump's points. I disagree with the notion that "Nintendo says no to gays" though. I believe a reaction is warranted but i think we are teetering into over reaction and slander. I personally view he fact that Nintendo commented at all should be seen as a small victory as it shows they are listening and hearing people out. Let's just be civil and keep an open mind on both sides.
That being said I could care less about the game itself.
That being said I could care less about the game itself.
because face it, most companies that show that they are pro gay, are usually under attack most of the time. Nintendo a children's "toy" maker can't take any more damage from their main target which are families who if we were looking at america, still have trouble accepting gays. etc. And I don't need evidence, it's obvious how how in this day the public still can't openly accept gay people.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
thoroughly researched arguments
Steve Youngblood
Member
I'll file this under "I don't actually follow evolving social trends and thus don't really know what I'm talking about."
El Pescado
Member
This is true. There wouldn't have been nearly as big if an outrage if they were just upfront about the whole thing. The game is over a year old and the translation has already been finished and the game has gone gold. They're not ignoring gay marriage because they're making a statement. They're ignoring it because the team is probably too busy working on something else to add it.
Was there such an outrage in Japan when the game was released? I know part of Nintendo's explanation of the confusion about gay marriage was that Japanese gamers were just crossdressing their Miis so Female Miis would appear Male and stuff, but was there such a commotion about everything?
I just feel bad that Tye's original message was about specifically not boycotting and just raising awareness for a potential sequel and the whole thing blew up so bad that I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo canned the whole thing.
sure sure ;d
you just need to face the reality, Gay isn't still socially acceptable to majority of the US population especially kids.
vinnygambini
Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
I believe it could alter the rating, it's really hard to grasp as to how they could rate Tomodachi Life especially with such a broad idea of what sexual themes encompasses (Sexual Themes - References to sex or sexuality).
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I don't think you followed the society evolution in the last 30 years regarding homosexuality.
I literally swoon when you make these incredible posts. I wish I had that capacity to write.
chrominance
Member
It's always a victory when a company feels they need to speak out on the issue; it means it's big enough that it can't be ignored. That said, Nintendo made no commitments here, and positioned same-sex marriage as "social commentary" they wanted to avoid, ignoring that including any form of marriage immediately enters them into that conversation no matter what they wanted.
That's different from saying "we hate gays," sure, but at the end of the day Nintendo didn't address any of the #miiquality issues and ignored the proposed solutions Tye put forward. That says to me that Nintendo, as a corporate entity, doesn't care about this issue enough to do anything about it.
I'd quit while you're behind.
RyanPierre
Member
A company like Nintendo is part of the "real world" around us, believe it or not. In fact, their games can help shape children's impressions of the world as they grow up and learn about it. These bits of media in the world each contribute in some small way to a society's views on issues. Public opinion shifts gradually, and the media plays a big part in driving those changing views. You mentioned throwing emotion into changing the views of traditional marriage instead of putting it all into this campaign, but don't you see how they are one in the same? Thrusting this into the spotlight is part of how people work to help change these views.
As evidenced by the media focus on this topic, it's actually "anti-gay" companies that are under attack literally all of the time.
Metallix87
Member
Is Modern Family a kids show?
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Something tells me the OP and all the other LBGT posters here are forced to "face the reality" every day as they are constantly reminded by law and other people that they aren't equal and won't be equal any time soon. The question now becomes whether "facing reality" means accepting it and living without dignity, or fighting to achieve dignity.
Interesting I know a gay guy, who i used to play card games with. He won't admit he's gay openly in fear of embarrassment according to him.
Is simply referencing gay people means for a rating plummet? You already have sex between a heterosexual couple implied with the fact babies are born, I fail to see how that doesn't alter the rating either.
Gay guy you know /=/ all gay people. Also, that might be a result of years of being told gay people are "unnatural" and the like.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Right. Here's some links to pieces about a Pew Research Survey: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...th-gays-and-lesbians-social-acceptance-rises/
http://www.people-press.org/2013/06...pponents-see-legal-recognition-as-inevitable/
Here are some highlights:
Do you have anything to contribute in regards to where we are going on this issue that is more substantial than what your gut tells you?
Many major polls show that over 50% of the US population is for LGBT rights. So yes, "gay is acceptable" to the majority of the US population.
The ignorance in some of these posts makes my head hurt.
constantstatic
Member
This so much to be a person whos very existence is either political or social commentary by default. To be considered a risk or a threat to decency enough to be written off has always had a particular sort of sting.
Lol what? Who cares if it's a family friendly company? Everyone should be accepting of homosexual relationships and marriages. I'd rather Nintendo not bow down to bigoted nut job groups.
Metallix87
Member
I'm fairly sure that, as a result of the "uproar" (if you choose to call it that), the sequel will have gay and lesbian options available.
"Nintendo doesn't need another mess on their hands"
I don't understand why it's better to have pro-equality folks against you (and frankly, the obvious tide of history) than it is to have anti-equality folks against you? I literally can't understand why it's better to have the current bad press than some phantom bad press that might be generated by actually being "neutral" on this issue and not promoting one type of relationship vs another.
I don't understand why it's better to have pro-equality folks against you (and frankly, the obvious tide of history) than it is to have anti-equality folks against you? I literally can't understand why it's better to have the current bad press than some phantom bad press that might be generated by actually being "neutral" on this issue and not promoting one type of relationship vs another.
constantstatic
Member
Yeah this whole family friendly argument makes me so angry. What about being gay is not family friendly?
vinnygambini
Why are strippers at the U.N. bad when they're great at strip clubs???
I remember reading, though a long time ago and the ESRB's stance must of changed since then, that in the early 1990's Enix was ordered to remove a gay bar from Dragon Warrior III or suffer a M rating from ESRB if it did not comply.
To answer your question, I'm not sure and that's why I asked. Would Tomodachi Life suffer a ratings drop on the premise of adding same-sex relationships?
Edit: As per Stumpokapow, it seems I was incorrect.
Rolodzeo
Member
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Good Luck, Charlie is, as is Sesame Street, but the question is moot because again if you start with the assumption that same-sex relationships are political or a statement or inappropriate for kids but that opposite-sex relationships are neutral or apolitical or something kids should be used to, you are embedding heteronormative assumptions that devalue gay relationships. Unless kids shows should never depict parenting (virtually all of them do and this is not a controversial thing), then we have a choice to confirm or refute heteronormative assumptions about the world.
First, I've read the whole thread. Your last post in the thread was worrying that negative feedback would hurt Nintendo's feels and cause them to not localize the game at all, which the implication that people should ease up as a result. If Nintendo is so paralyzed and unable to respond to region-specific social issues that they can't release a game in a region, that's on them, not the people concerned with the issues to begin with. As I expressed above in my reply to BY2K, I think your approach here is wrong. Entering this thread to worry about Nintendo's feelings or the impact on Nintendo is I believe an error.
Second, as I've expressed above, the idea that opposite-sex relationships are "neutral", "apolitical", "not a discussion of sexual orientation", "normal", "the default" while same-sex relationships are "social activism", "political", "involving young children in the discussion of sexual orientation", "a bonus feature" is itself a problem. That's heteronormativity. If heteronormativity is embedded in the ESRB guidelines, that's wrong and hurtful and something that should change. Having straight couples is inherently a discussion of sexual orientation; it teaches kids that you build partnerships with a member of the opposite sex, and that these partnerships can lead to children. The idea that having gay couples somehow sexualizes the whole thing is a canard.
Third, as I've expressed above, the idea that in a situation where injustice exists, a person or company can simply shrug and say "I'm not against equality, I just don't want to get involved in this debate" is tacitly confirming the status quo and making a value judgment that the concerns of people who do not want equality are more important than the concerns of people who do. Whether that's based on business logic or not, it's gutless and hurtful to those just fighting for their own dignity.
Finally, I actually doubt the ESRB would assign a separate rating. They have no descriptor specifically for same-sex relationship content. Games get ratings based on the aggregate of the content that their descriptors earns them, in concert with the intended rating of the publisher submitted. Although games like The Sims have a T rating, their depiction of coupling is markedly different and a much better explanation behind the rating than the presence of same-sex partnership options.
What we can do is look for games that have discussion of sexual orientation but no depiction of sex, and see whether they earned descriptors like "sexual themes" or "sexual content". Metal Gear Solid 2 does not have a sexual themes descriptor. Metal Gear Solid 3, which discusses sadism, does have a sexual themes descriptor. Both discuss sexual orientation. Ergo, we can assume that even 10 years ago, discussion of sexual orientation did not inherently add a sexual themes descriptor, which is presumably the descriptor that would be applied. That the game has an M rating for nudity, violence, and blood and gore is moot to the discussion we're having now.
Do you have a specific example of a game whose content profile you feel fits Tomodachi Life's, but which got a higher rating based on depiction of same-sex couples in a way similar to the way opposite-sex couples are depicted in Tomodachi Life, and which is recent enough to assert for sure that the ESRB would still feel the same way, especially in light of the changes in public opinion on the subject over the last 10 years?
Opinionatedfish
Member
It occurs to me that a lot of games, books, movies with female characters or male characters don't offer a gender option in them or the ability to have sexual preferences of all sorts inside of them.
We need to go back to all of those forms of media and patch that in.
Seriously, it's a damn shame that Tomb Raider isn't about having sexual orgies with dinosaurs. #tombraptor #orgycroft
Why isn't there a male version of the Venus De Milo at the Louv're? There NEEDS to be one right next to it to be fair and non-exclusionary. #penusdemilo #hermaphroditeofmilos
The video game Uncharted needs less posturing and more collecting Rarity because Rarity is the best pony. #bronydog #whythehatenate
Women are Citizens too, Orson Wells. HOW DARE YOU. #girlscansledtoo #menarealsobadsingers
All silliness aside, here are the things I came here to post.
I also want to comment that Furries aren't about kink. It's about a "fursona" or "spirit animal" to most of the people involved. It's making an avatar that represents yourself that happens to be an animal. Just as being LGBTQ isn't about anal sex or scissoring. It's about emotional attraction as well. Not everything is about sex and the whole push for "Gay Marriage" isn't always about sex. It's about equal protection and representation for a union of two people under the law. That said, I've found the Dictionaries have multiple definitions for words. There is no reason why Marriage can't be defined by Religion as between one man and one woman, and by the Law as being between two persons who may or may not be opposite genders. We don't need to redefine marriage, we need to add to the definition of marriage.
I think that the ability for two males or two females to get married in a game focused on humor would be acceptable in the United States because the game is about being quirky and some people find things like cross-dressing or same gender pairing to be quirky or amusing. However, that pairing does not lead to a biological pairing that would combine the DNA of the two characters involved. Which is the purpose of the feature in the game. A long drawn out sequence where you build a biological clone would be an over-extension of the joke. :-/ The point of the marriage ceremony in the game is to produce ugly looking babies who you send
out via StreetPass. Yes, it's a good chunk of the social aspect of the game and it is how you expand the amount of available buildings. Adding in adoption would change one of the dynamics of the game and require the game to explain where the child comes from. Again, over extending. In a way, Tomodachi Life has something in common with Tokyo Jungle.
But yeah. #penusdemilo *giggle*
We need to go back to all of those forms of media and patch that in.
Seriously, it's a damn shame that Tomb Raider isn't about having sexual orgies with dinosaurs. #tombraptor #orgycroft
Why isn't there a male version of the Venus De Milo at the Louv're? There NEEDS to be one right next to it to be fair and non-exclusionary. #penusdemilo #hermaphroditeofmilos
#whyisantiochanticock
The video game Uncharted needs less posturing and more collecting Rarity because Rarity is the best pony. #bronydog #whythehatenate
Women are Citizens too, Orson Wells. HOW DARE YOU. #girlscansledtoo #menarealsobadsingers
Truthfully, I just wanted to play with hashtags and #penusdemilo is a great hashtag. I know that it is not spelled correctly. That's part of the joke.
All silliness aside, here are the things I came here to post.
- The original story about the patch to the 3DS game was flawed.
- Tomadachi Life is a game where you take your personal Mii and the Miis of your friends into a weird fantasy world. So, it's natural that people want it to reflect their own reality.
- You don't have any real control over who your Mii falls in love with.
- There was never female/female or asexual pairing in the glitch.
- The amount of testing to patch in a same gender/no gender attraction rate would be a waste of resources when they can just put that variable into Tomadachi 3 instead.
- The #miiquality guy is not pushing for a boycott. (or a girlcott. Let's be inclusive here.) Buy the game to support the franchise and then use the #hashtag with a picture of your purchased copy to show that you want the option in the third title.
- You can't choose who your Mii's love. You can't control who your Mii's marry. So, the scenario the original post creator/promoter envisioned isn't entirely viable. Sorry, that's not how the game operates.
I also want to comment that Furries aren't about kink. It's about a "fursona" or "spirit animal" to most of the people involved. It's making an avatar that represents yourself that happens to be an animal. Just as being LGBTQ isn't about anal sex or scissoring. It's about emotional attraction as well. Not everything is about sex and the whole push for "Gay Marriage" isn't always about sex. It's about equal protection and representation for a union of two people under the law. That said, I've found the Dictionaries have multiple definitions for words. There is no reason why Marriage can't be defined by Religion as between one man and one woman, and by the Law as being between two persons who may or may not be opposite genders. We don't need to redefine marriage, we need to add to the definition of marriage.
I think that the ability for two males or two females to get married in a game focused on humor would be acceptable in the United States because the game is about being quirky and some people find things like cross-dressing or same gender pairing to be quirky or amusing. However, that pairing does not lead to a biological pairing that would combine the DNA of the two characters involved. Which is the purpose of the feature in the game. A long drawn out sequence where you build a biological clone would be an over-extension of the joke. :-/ The point of the marriage ceremony in the game is to produce ugly looking babies who you send
into the labyrinth.
You can't make baby Poms in Tokyo Jungle between two male or two female Poms. Maybe Sony should patch that ability in there?
But yeah. #penusdemilo *giggle*
constantstatic
Member
Because that is how the religious right has decided to attack gays and is used in all the propaganda here in the states. Gays are a threat to str8 families we will convert their children duh. This also makes me want to stop supporting nintendo.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
The ESRB didn't exist when Dragon Warrior III came out, so whatever you are referring to is clearly based on at least one incorrect assumption.
Mockingbird
Member
Maybe he's talking about the GBC version.
No it was the NES version: http://dragonquest.wikia.com/wiki/Forum:Dragon_Warrior_III's_Supposed_"Gay_Bar"
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Yeah, most of the censorship back then was decided by NOA localization.