The Naughty Dog Agenda - RobinGaming

#1
Couldn't really see where this fitted but didn't think it needed a new thread. Good piece by RobinGaming on the encompassing issues as a whole. While i can be applied broader, the content maker specifically narrows down on Naughty Dog for this piece though. Be warned! It is fair, balanced- maybe a couple of points are grasped at but overall a decent piece - 20 mins long

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bill O'Rights

Seldom posts. Always delivers.
#2
mod edit: Given this is a current affair and seems to be very limited outlets to discuss it, we feel this warrants a new thread under the new news, new thread rule. Keep it civil. Copied from other thread and OP notified - split from original thread (BOR)
 
Last edited:
#6
This shit is so tiring to me anymore. The game itself probably isn't even that heavy handed with anything, it's the game's industry writers that drive me insane. There will be a million opinion pieces about this game and how it's tearing down barriers and sticking it to the bigots.
 
Last edited:
#7
It´s funny how some people preach about the values and importance of a creators vision, that it should be maintained and not subjected to any form of censorship, that they should be free to create whatever they want without scrutiny, but when a creator has a vision about a lesbian couple, diversity, feminist themes or what not that don´t gel with these very same people they often seem to stand up and scream "AGENDA!" as loud as they can. How is that?
 
#8
It´s funny how some people preach about the values and importance of a creators vision, that it should be maintained and not subjected to any form of censorship, that they should be free to create whatever they want without scrutiny, but when a creator has a vision about a lesbian couple, diversity, feminist themes or what not that don´t gel with these very same people they often seem to stand up and scream "AGENDA!" as loud as they can. How is that?
"There seems to be an agenda here" vs "Everyone boycott this product because it does something I don't like!"

Can you spot the difference?
 
#11
They can do whatever they want to in their game. The only issue I have is it seemed they discriminated when selecting the reported and the new hand picked actor. Even that doesn't really bother me too much. It's just they seem to be doing the same things they chastised others for.
 
#12
I’m confused by the assertion that there is an agenda at all. I’ll take the homosexuality of the lead character, as an example. Homosexuality isn’t unusual. Isn’t more ununusal that it’s so rare in games? This isn’t an agenda, it’s an opportunity to have a narrative niche simply by including a massive segment of the population in a storyline. It’s clever because it feels fresh by default.

I do also feel very strongly that it’s the right thing to do though. Games should represent everyone. If straight males can’t handle playing as a gay female for one superb game, I wonder how they’d feel being a gay female gamer playing 99% of games.

Personally, I like when the character I’m playing as has a different experience/perspective than my own. That’s what makes it interesting. I think most people think that way when it comes to most things, otherwise most games would have main characters that work in offices or in trades...but they don’t, they feature space marines, zombie hunters and organized crime bosses.

The “agenda” seems to be on the other foot, so to speak, here. Why try to criticize the creative license of game makers? Their game, their choices. What’s being represented here is life, not a political agenda. Simply showing ordinary relationships isn’t evidence of an agenda. Is seeing two heterosexuals kiss in a game part of an anti-homosexual agenda? No, obviously not. If you view people living their lives as a political agenda, then your own political agenda has probably gotten the better of you.
 
#14
I'm going to give my personal opinion. I might offend someone, come off as complete bigot or even as a SJW. But again, this is just my personal opinion.

It's 100% obvious that Naughty Dog is trying to push an agenda. Do I think there's anything wrong with it? I used to think it there was something wrong with it, but I change my opinion over the past several years.

I used to think LBGT characters were being forced and that it was unnecessary because it served little to no purpose at all in some video games. One instance in particular is that of Kung Jin from Mortal Kombat X. I thought I was unnecessary to reveal that he was gay. I thought revealing he was gay served little to no purpose and that NetherRealm Studios just wanted to hop on the bandwagon and make gay character. I had similar reactions after playing The Last of Us: Left Behind when Ellie kissed Riley. I said to myself, "Ok? What's the point?"

After some time, I started to understand why this was happening, and I now I'm completely fine with it.

So, why did my opinion change?

I started to realize things similar things were happening years ago. Back then, the topic mainly focused on racial issues and not gender issues. America had a hard time accepting blacks and interracial relationships within the entertainment and sitcoms and music would push to have interracial couples and relations on screen.

Examples:
"Star Trek" the Interracial Kiss
"All in the Family" Sammy's Visit
"All in the Family" ft The Jeffersons
"Jungle Fever"
"SNL" Richard Pryor and Chevy Chase Job Interview"

Some people are going to say that these are in no way similar to that of what's happening now, but is it really that much different? I know people cringed at seeing Ellie and her girlfriend kiss during the Last of Us 2 gameplay trailer and I know for a fact that people also cringed when they saw Captain Kirk kiss Uhura in the 60's. It took decades for blacks and interracial relationships to be accepted on TV and it started when someone pushed for it be shown on TV. Some of these shows were called defining moments in entertainment because they broke barriers. Someone pushed for it to happen and it's why it's easier for America to accept today.

I started writing stories a few years ago and I finally understand why Neil Druckmann is doing this. He wants to break barriers just like people did before him and It's hard for me to complain about that. When I started writing, I slowly started to think about my audience and how I can reach out to people of all genders and racial backgrounds. I don't want to target just one specific group, I want to target as many as I can without trying to force anything.


I may sound l like some random Neil Druckmann fan, but I really do appreciate his work. Writing and reflecting on things that happened in the past helped me to understand why these things are happening. The ending of Uncharted 4 shows that they could have a female protagonist going forward, but will the series be that much different if another male character took the lead role? I think not.

These are just my opinions and how I feel about the entire situation. I don't really care if anyone disagrees - it's just my own personal opinion.

PS: I know my post has some errors (grammar and spelling) but I'm too lazy to go back and correct them.
 
#15
It´s funny how some people preach about the values and importance of a creators vision, that it should be maintained and not subjected to any form of censorship, that they should be free to create whatever they want without scrutiny, but when a creator has a vision about a lesbian couple, diversity, feminist themes or what not that don´t gel with these very same people they often seem to stand up and scream "AGENDA!" as loud as they can. How is that?
I feel like anyone that takes offense at this comment (not saying that anyone does, though), should probably take a step back and seriously consider whether or not they are helping to create an obvious double standard. Maybe it would even do some good to consider what the end game of that double standard might be.
 
#18
It´s funny how some people preach about the values and importance of a creators vision, that it should be maintained and not subjected to any form of censorship, that they should be free to create whatever they want without scrutiny, but when a creator has a vision about a lesbian couple, diversity, feminist themes or what not that don´t gel with these very same people they often seem to stand up and scream "AGENDA!" as loud as they can. How is that?
That's not what he said. Listen more closely. And the word 'agenda' is taken from Neil's own mouth.
 

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
#19
Good video.

It is obvious that Druckmann has an agenda, which is fine. It is his game to make. The market will decide whether they like it or not.

The absurd notion that pointing the agenda out is somehow indicative of being on the wrong side of history though it what bothers me. I personally have no issues with Ellie being gay or sharing a kiss in game. That is part of what makes her a interesting character. I do kind of find it jarring that it would be the central focus of that trailer though. It felt forced. Like it was only there for the (negative) attention it would get (which in a way is good marketing I guess).

Games should represent everyone. If straight males can’t handle playing as a gay female for one superb game, I wonder how they’d feel being a gay female gamer playing 99% of games.

Personally, I like when the character I’m playing as has a different experience/perspective than my own. That’s what makes it interesting.
Now this is an interesting statement. It is completely contradictory. You enjoy the escapism of a game - of not playing yourself as a character, but you think that everyone should be represented arch-typically in games. Why should everyone be represented in games if gaming is about escaping reality to experience a story?

It is very much possible to represent all types of people without giving into tokenism for wokeness points. The entire series of the Uncharted games is very diverse, to the point that you don't notice it because it is natural. Diversity representation in the modern sense to the far left is all about segregation, at which point it becomes obvious they are ticking off checkmarks on a list of tropes. It is about taking away people's individuality.

What type of genitals you have and who you rub genitals with aren't the only defining characteristics for most people, I'd hope. Nor is your skin color. We are all a combination of many parts, and are individuals. No one will ever be fully represented in a game - because the game isn't about them.

I'll ignore the silly "straight male" remark.
 
Last edited:
#20
I can spot the hypocrisy, is that good enough?

"There must be an agenda here because this developer does something that I don´t like."
That's interesting because the kiss in Left Behind was beautiful and honest. So, you have to ask yourself, why is it that someone who has no problem with two women kissing or women in games (Tombraider being my favourite franchise before she went rambo), suddenly takes exception to this issue? The thing here is 'the issue'. People from the extreme side of 'equality' have a propensity to demonise anyone who doesn't agree with them and so 'the issue' is marginalised by default. There are two separate issues being conflated: Is homosexuality or women in games OK? (YES) and, Should developers include homosexuality or women in games because of pressure from SJWs or acceptance of SJW rhetoric? (the answer to that is NO in my opinion). One is natural and you can feel it's natural, the other is agenda driven and feels agenda driven.

This is what Robin is talking about.
 
Last edited:
#21
Just talked about this in the Rockstar thread. I really don't like Robin's assertion that "most of us play games to have fun, to escape reality, and experience great stories that don't strongly push an agenda but simply entertain." I've been playing games, reading books, watching movies, etc for a long time. Some days I like a good popcorn movie. Other days I want something really heavy and messed up.

If you disagree with Naughty Dog's/Druckmann's "agenda" then no worries, there are plenty of other games to play. However I think we should celebrate the fact that he is able to make something true to his vision.
 
#22
The ending of Uncharted 4 shows that they could have a female protagonist going forward, but will the series be that much different if another male character took the lead role? I think not.
Many people loved the ending of U4
and I would have loved a continuation with female that's a mix of Elena and Drake, but that's not what we got. U:TLL showed us it can work with Chloe
But I didn't see anything of Elena or Nathan in her.
She seem more likely to have her own Feminist youtube channel then being a treasure hunter
I mean I love Uncharted 4 and Neil does touch on some moral subjects which is good.
But I pretend the ending never happened and Nadine did get her comeuppance
Nadine being in U:TLL made zero sense.
I'm sure I am probably the only one that feels this way.
Same with new Tomb Raider. Love Tomb Raider and still buy and play the new ones but can't stand the new whiney moody Lara.
She was a confident strong woman before but now..
 
Last edited:
#23
I did find it odd how they talked so much about the sexualization of women, but the first reveal of last of us 2 this E3 involved the focal point being the kiss between Ellie and that chick

Don’t really have any issues with that, just strange and hypocritical imo, to have that the focal point of Ellies first solo game reveal. Not sure if others disagree
 
#24
When Naughty Dog (post-release) started insinuating Nadine & Chloe in Uncharted Lost Legacy were actually lesbians, that's when we (as gamers & consumers of their prior work) have every right to say WTF. Chloe (FYI) was totally heterosexual in Uncharted 2 & slept with Drake + Flynn. Add Ellie's lesbianism & voilà, we have Naughty Dog as the numero uno lesbian superfans. That's fine, i.e. their games, their rules. But don't act surprised when some of us realize they're more interested in social engineering than actual video games.

This is evident based upon Druckmann's assertion female characters are 'role models' (insofar as he can affect society via gaming). That's in & of itself a dubious claim, but even more so within the context of Druckmann himself deeming physically attractive female characters as 'problematic'. It's all subjective, i.e. a frumpy lesbian with deep feelings doesn't automatically have more depth than Cortana (an example he used).

I mean where are we going here? It's a shallow premise which collapses upon close inspection.
 
#25
I really don't like Robin's assertion that "most of us play games to have fun, to escape reality, and experience great stories that don't strongly push an agenda but simply entertain."
Agreed. The industry has grown since Pong quite a bit. If the creators have "an agenda" I think they should be allowed to put it forward. I may not agree with it, as a matter of fact, it may deter me from getting the game. But it's within their right. If pure gameplay is your thing, there are plenty of games to choose from.

I mean, contemporary games can be like movies at times (in the case of Naughty Dog especially so). Many directors include subtle (and not-so-subtle) bits about their beliefs and values into their work. I don't think that's bad, it's within their right and especially quite human. I don't think it's necessarily bowing down to any kind of public pressure.

(as to TLoU 2, I'll reserve my judgment until I play the actual game - the few minutes of story we've seen so far is just way too little to go on)
 
#26
I'm glad this content is getting bigger in videogame entertainment. Everyone should be glad this "agenda" (if that's even what it is) is getting more attention and discussion ("at least we started a discussion") and insight. Even if you hate this "agenda" and you think it's deplorable, you should be happy it is in big AAA games.

Because the sooner we can let consumers buy the content they want without an insidious accusation of all the content being cis-white-hetero-normative "propaganda" oppressing every other race, gender, and orientation that exists, then the sooner we can all go back to enjoying our videogames how we see fit. If these games thrive because there's a huge audience, good, because it shows that the videogame market is servings its fans. If these games flop because there's not a huge audience, so be it. Guess the audience wasn't as big as their shouts seemed to imply.

But when you have the world's highest-selling videogame console pushing a lesbian relationship in a multi-million dollar, AAAA videogame, then I think it's okay for us to chill out a bit with the pulpit-pounding, pretending like videogames are violent and hostile toward any non-white-straight-male gamer.
 
#27
I don't need entertainment media to desensitize me towards homosexuality, I am fully capable of coming to my own conclusions based on reality. I'm glad I dislike their games as I will not be torn about whether I should support their agenda.
 
#28
On what planet do they think shoving lesbian relationships in to games where most of the buyers and players are male is a good idea? Once I seen that crap, I just became uninterested. Put lesbians in as much as you like, but I have no desire to play it. No need to boycott.
 
#29
I don't need entertainment media to desensitize me towards homosexuality, I am fully capable of coming to my own conclusions based on reality. I'm glad I dislike their games as I will not be torn about whether I should support their agenda.
Okay so are you suggesting that entertainment media should never try to do that? Where's the line? Should entertainment media not feature a lead character who happens to be gay? What do you want to see out of "entertainment media"?
 
#30
At the end of the day the creators decide where the story goes, if people don't like it then the creators got it wrong and need to change going forward.
 
#31
Man, we wouldn't have this entire conversation if Ellie was kissing a guy which makes me wonder at what point people stop consider same sex couple as something "wierd" and see as normal couple? If that's ND so called "agenda" then I'm all for it because it needs to start from somewhere.
 
Last edited:
#32
Okay so are you suggesting that entertainment media should never try to do that? Where's the line? Should entertainment media not feature a lead character who happens to be gay? What do you want to see out of "entertainment media"?
I would like to see entertainment, not social engineering.
 
#33
I quite enjoyed the video.

My main gripe with Naughty Dog games is that their mechanics are so average (likewise Rockstar) but that’s beside the point.

What is cringeworthy about their approach to social issues is how shallow it is. Their idea of a strong woman is a strong man with pigtails. A psychopath with breasts. It’s the most embarrassingly, unimaginative male version of what women should be.
 
#34
At the end of the day the creators decide where the story goes, if people don't like it then the creators got it wrong and need to change going forward.
...short of bankruptcy, why? I guess this boils down to the question whether video games are art or not (and there are argument for and against - ignore the late Ebert, he was too old of a dog for new tricks). But assuming they are art, I don't think it's ever the function for an artist to please everyone. Continuing with the movie analogy, take something like Lars von Trier's "Antichrist". I can't say I "enjoyed" it, at least in terms of entertainment, it's far from a popcorn flick. As a matter of fact, while I like to think I've seen enough horror and gore to be pretty much desensitized to everything, there where scenes that were really tough to stomach.

And yet I'm glad the director went with his vision, because watching it was a very unique and impactful experience. But suppose you're not into that? There will still be summer blockbusters, no worries. Similarly, there will be games focused purely on gameplay with very shallow (if any) story, if that's what you prefer.
 
#35
Agree with the video. Naughty Dog games never interest me that much anyway because of the cinematic approach but now i couldn't care less.
 
#36
I would like to see entertainment, not social engineering.
I'll ask again: should entertainment never contain something deeper? What form would you like to see all entertainment take? Keep in mind I am entertained by 1984, Rage Against The Machine, and Mad Max Fury Road - I imagine those would all be offensive to you.

Edit: typo
 
Last edited:
#37
Man, we wouldn't have this entire conversation if Ellie was kissing a guy which makes me wonder at what point people stop consider same sex couple as something "wierd" and see as normal couple? If that's ND so called "agenda" then I'm all for it because it needs to start from somewhere.
Nobody in this thread or Robin's video has said there's something 'weird' about same sex relationships. It's normal in this day and age. Get over it. Robin and the people in this thread are talking about an 'agenda' (Neil's words not mine) to 'force' sexuality into games in order to sate SJWs. These are two different subjects.
 
Last edited:
#38
I really don't like Robin's assertion that "most of us play games to have fun, to escape reality, and experience great stories that don't strongly push an agenda but simply entertain."
He's right though. It's what the majority of games do (simply entertain) and it's what most gamers want (entertainment). It's what made it possible to grow the game industry to the size it is now.

Does that mean it should remain that way? No, not necessarily. But that's where the money is right now. Personally I'm not too thrilled to see games politicized when anything and everything already is. The more ND pushes their agenda in their games, the more they'll alienate their current fanbase. I for one haven't been interested in their recent projects. They may push on and find a new audience, or they may lose Sony's support, or they could find themselves forced to make games without pushing their ideology. Best of luck to them in any case.
 
#39
Man, we wouldn't have this entire conversation if Ellie was kissing a guy which makes me wonder at what point people stop consider same sex couple as something "wierd" and see as normal couple? If that's ND so called "agenda" then I'm all for it because it needs to start from somewhere.
It'll always be something which is mostly just relevant to the 4% or so who're actually lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender. I mean that's a statistical fact here, i.e. make a product with heterosexual characters = appeal to 90%+ of society. Anything which involves a lifestyle only practised by a minuscule minority will always likely be 'weird' to the majority in some form or another. If someone produced a game (with 'realism' aspirations) in which the main character was an ardent wiccan practitioner, many (i.e. the majority) would say "dude, weird". Why? Because it doesn't relate to them at all. That doesn't mean they would all be wiccan haters.

Here's where it gets iffy (& the entire moral righteousness of the inclusiveness crowd goes off the rails): when people who have no real interest in lesbians & don't get giddy at the thought of playing as one (pertaining to this Naughty Dog topic) are subjected to insults (such as devs on Twitter mischaracterizing their critics as 'nerdraging women haters' & telling former/potential customers to 'fuck off'), hostility is always predictable.

It actually looks pretty bad under that light, i.e. a "play & love these lesbian & transgender characters or else ur a bigot!!!" ultimatum. That's not cool.
 
D

Deleted member 738645

Unconfirmed Member
#40
And yet, TLOU2 will probably sell like hotcakes and might end up being the best sold PS exclusive ever considering how well the first game did-
 
#41
I'll ask again: should entertainment never contain something deeper? What form would you like to see all entertainment take? Keep in mind I am entertained by 1984, Rage Against The Machine, and Mad Max Fury Road - I imagine those would all be offensive to you.

Edit: typo
'Deeper" is entirely subjective. A moody angsty teenager with 'issues' might be considered deep to some, but to others it's freaking boring. Meanwhile I can watch L.A. Confidential & say Kim Basinger's character (a sexy high class escort) was far deeper than anything in Naughty Dog's video games. As I said, Naughty Dog & others (ahem, Anita) don't get to define 'what' a deep & meaningful portrayal of a women is.

For self-proclaimed 'diversity' enthusiasts, they sure do seem to want uniformity of views & representation (such as Druckmann shitting all over sexy characters because 'social reasons').
 
#42
He's right though. It's what the majority of games do (simply entertain) and it's what most gamers want (entertainment). It's what made it possible to grow the game industry to the size it is now.

Does that mean it should remain that way? No, not necessarily. But that's where the money is right now. Personally I'm not too thrilled to see games politicized when anything and everything already is. The more ND pushes their agenda in their games, the more they'll alienate their current fanbase. I for one haven't been interested in their recent projects. They may push on and find a new audience, or they may lose Sony's support, or they could find themselves forced to make games without pushing their ideology. Best of luck to them in any case.
You seem to suggest that Last of Us Part II should be relegated to a more niche genre of gaming and that bigger games with no agenda should be at the forefront because that's where the money is right now. Buuuut Naughty Dog is doing pretty damn well so I don't really think that's true. AND there's even another thread right now about how great Rockstar is for being "agenda-less" when Grand Theft Auto V is wall-to-wall social commentary and one of the best selling games of all time.

I don't know how anyone can think "most" gamers want pure popcorn entertainment. And seriously it really seems like "see games politicized" means featuring a gay character. Spec Ops is praised. Grand Theft Auto is praised. System Shock & Bioshock are praised. I can't for the life of me understand why this is so egregious. Though maybe Robin dislikes those too.
 
#43
It'll always be something which is mostly just relevant to the 4% or so who're actually lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender. I mean that's a statistical fact here, i.e. make a product with heterosexual characters = appeal to 90%+ of society. Anything which involves a lifestyle only practised by a minuscule minority will always likely be 'weird' to the majority in some form or another.
I'm myself neither is gay, bisexual or transgender but I have no problem with this because playing as gay character is no different than playing female or male, at end of day the actual characters matters not their sexual preference. I guess shouldn't like games like NieR Automata because it about Androids and clearly not an android.
 
#44
When Naughty Dog (post-release) started insinuating Nadine & Chloe in Uncharted Lost Legacy were actually lesbians, that's when we (as gamers & consumers of their prior work) have every right to say WTF. Chloe (FYI) was totally heterosexual in Uncharted 2 & slept with Drake + Flynn. Add Ellie's lesbianism & voilà, we have Naughty Dog as the numero uno lesbian superfans. That's fine, i.e. their games, their rules. But don't act surprised when some of us realize they're more interested in social engineering than actual video games.

This is evident based upon Druckmann's assertion female characters are 'role models' (insofar as he can affect society via gaming). That's in & of itself a dubious claim, but even more so within the context of Druckmann himself deeming physically attractive female characters as 'problematic'. It's all subjective, i.e. a frumpy lesbian with deep feelings doesn't automatically have more depth than Cortana (an example he used).

I mean where are we going here? It's a shallow premise which collapses upon close inspection.
I’m still in disbelief that they even used Cortana as an example. Evident they have never played a halo game in their life
 
#45
[Naughty Dog] may lose Sony's support
So far that's highly unlikely. For one, their games keep selling very well. The latest GoW has certainly raised the expectations in terms of sales (at least within a short period), but they're still among the top-selling first-party studios.

And also, ND is the home of "ICE", i.e. Sony's gaming R&D department. The work they do on various technologies eventually (can) benefit all of the first-party studios. If they've really managed to take "motion matching" and make it look so convincing as it does in the E3 trailer, I'm drooling at the prospect of what other studios can do with it, even if I didn't end up enjoying TLoU 2.

I guess shouldn't like games like NieR Automata because it about Androids and clearly not an android.
...you know who'd absolutely say that? An android!
 
#46
Good vid. I have said in one of the Tlou 2 response vids. I have no problem with diversity, but its the agenda that i have problem with which the devs decide to force into the games, and tlou2 trailer is just way too blatant in that regards.
 
#47
Good vid. I have said in one of the Tlou 2 response vids. I have no problem with diversity, but its the agenda that i have problem with which the devs decide to force into the games, and tlou2 trailer is just way too blatant in that regards.
I'm sure many people who are complaining wouldn't do it if the game developer had an agenda they support.
 
Last edited:
#48
'Deeper" is entirely subjective. A moody angsty teenager with 'issues' might be considered deep to some, but to others it's freaking boring.
I mean, I agree but my point was that they should be allowed to at least try to tell a deeper story.

Meanwhile I can watch L.A. Confidential & say Kim Basinger's character (a sexy high class escort) was far deeper than anything in Naughty Dog's video games.
Okay...cool. We can have both. Is your point here that Kim Basinger in L.A. Confidential is a deeper character than Ellie so therefore Druckmann should have just bailed on Ellie as a character?

For self-proclaimed 'diversity' enthusiasts, they sure do seem to want uniformity of views & representation (such as Druckmann shitting all over sexy characters because 'social reasons').
Was this a poll you took? I don't understand this point other than an attempt to be inflammatory. I'm going to go ahead and assume this is a hyperbolic straw man that you made up. I would disagree with Druckmann if he was just shitting on sexy characters for being sexy but I'm going to assume there was some additional context to this. Happy to be proven wrong though.
 
#49
Meanwhile I can watch L.A. Confidential & say Kim Basinger's character (a sexy high class escort) was far deeper than anything in Naughty Dog's video games.
This is essentially where I'm at too. You read Madame Bovary, Anna Karenina and good old Jane Austen and consider these incredible female characters who demonstrate the entire breadth of the human experience, and then you compare it to a lady kicking chaps in the balls and swinging through the jungle.

I personally don't think games should attempt any sort of message at all. I think it is a poor, limited medium for such a lofty goal. It's like trying to sail the Atlantic on a piano. Games are a craft, not an art - the magic is in the design and the mechanics and the physical interaction between the player and the sprites on the screen. As a caveat, I'd say something like Bioshock does a good job of conveying a mood - so the concept of individuality and objectivism is neatly portrayed.

I suppose the one good thing you could say is that Naughty Dog is paving the way for other types of character to be portrayed in an utterly banal, simplistic manner; and I guess that's a good thing if you're into utterly banal, simplistic characters.
 
#50
It feels like they have been pushing an agenda for awhile. They haven't been to harsh about it but you can see the gradual move towards it. I do wonder if they will end up going to far with it. Reminds me of the youtuber who likes to say go woke ,go broke which I always found funny.