Support NeoGAF

[Cactuarman]

I'll keep my language simple. "Progressives" When I wrote "they" I meant "progressives".

I figured. Thanks for being straightforward.

Edit: originally said honest but didn't want to imply that you weren't being honest before

 

[Barsinister]

I figured. Thanks for being straightforward.

Edit: originally said honest but didn't want to imply that you weren't being honest before

Honesty is the best policy.

 

[Cosmogony]

Seems like that would help frame your view point but fair enough.



on·tol·o·gy
noun

1. the branch of metaphysics dealing with the nature of being.
2. a set of concepts and categories in a subject area or domain that shows their properties and the relations between them.
   "what's new about our ontology is that it is created automatically from large datasets"

Had to check the definition here - still trying to connect this with what @ColdToffee said. Again, seemed to me like they were arguing against a framework because he/she was refuting notions of what Naughty Dog should do or what video games should be.



How are these two things at all at odds given what he/she was arguing. Here I'll square it: game devs should make the games they want to make, because video games as a category should be more than simply "entertainment." I sense the response is: so how do you determine what something "should" be? Well, RobinGaming has one point of view on "should" and I have another. I would argue mine is "right" because it argues for creator autonomy and that the only "should" is freedom to create / push an agenda personal to you (like every other medium).



Thanks for the warning but who is "they"? Is "they" someone who approves of Naughty Dog's agenda? Or is "they" someone who struggles, either consciously or not, to keep an argument on-track? Both? Quite a lot of this thread has gotten off track, is this some sort of general warming? Also, I'm not sure how a bad argument would ever "trap" someone. Your warning seems to be about a distraction rather than a trap.

What I mean is that there are certain attributes that make videogames videogames. Videogames cannot be videogames without having them, the same way a chair is not a chair if you can't sit on it. "Being more than just fun" is not one of such attributes - I'd be able to cite dozens of counterexamples, that are all about having un and nothing more, Pacman, Arkanoid, Jet Set Willy, etc., - and, as such, it's up to each individual dev to decide whether or not their own particular game should be about more than just fun.

I hope my point is clear now.

 

[Cactuarman]

What I mean is that there are certain attributes that make videogames videogames. Videogames cannot be videogames without having them, the same way a chair is not a chair if you can't sit on it. "Being more than just fun" is not one of such attributes - I'd be able to cite dozens of counterexamples, that are all about having un and nothing more, Pacman, Arkanoid, Jet Set Willy, etc., - and, as such, it's up to each individual dev to decide whether or not their own particular game should be about more than just fun.

I believe I understand but my argument is that your perspective is limiting. No one is saying that video games can't just be fun, but instead that they can be more than "just fun" should devs choose to make them that way. Examples of video games that are "just fun" aren't counterexamples. They're just examples. Pac Man is a video game. After Sunlight is a video game. One is fun. One is, well, depressing.

I'd argue that the only attribute that make a video game a video game is something that lets you manipulate images on a screen. I don't think anyone argued that devs had to make all of their games "more than just fun" so I think we're all in agreement with the second part.

 

[woigemok]

Sony Playstation studios = SJW gaming studios

 

[Cosmogony]

I believe I understand but my argument is that your perspective is limiting. No one is saying that video games can't just be fun, but instead that they can be more than "just fun" should devs choose to make them that way.

And I fully agree. My impression, and I can't be bothered to pull the relevant quote, was that someone was arguing that trhey must be more then fun.

 

[Cactuarman]

And I fully agree. My impression, and I can't be bothered to pull the relevant quote, was that someone was arguing that trhey must be more then fun.

Ah, fair enough. Sounds like we're on the same page then.

 

[NahaNago]

Sony Playstation studios = SJW gaming studios

I mean you have Microsoft publishing Killer Instinct and Nintendo publishing Bayonetta that would kinda now make Sony the SJW of the bunch.

 

[HaveButOneLife]

My issue with that specific comment was that I disagreed that "absolutely no one" was using language like "troubling" agendas or "ruining" video games.

And I've agreed with plenty of points made by people who I overall disagree with. I agreed with @Jon Neu about "insane" in that same comment (and others previously). I'd like to think I've been rational and respectful but maybe not.



If you were asking about my overall issue - ultimately I don't think "louder voices" have more impact that money. Whether or not more gamers are conservative, the fact that Naughty Dog is doing so well as a company suggests that the majority of gamers (conservative or not) like their games. Maybe the pendulum will swing the other way and Naughty Dog will suffer because of it. But the main theme I've stuck to is that Neil Druckmann should be allowed to make whatever game he wants to make and that the video game industry is better off when story tellers are able to experiment and put out stuff they care about (regardless of if people like it - just like other forms of art).

Edit: fixed an awkward sentence

This is one of the only posts that I have trouble replying with. Not because there's so much to digest and reply to, but quite the opposite because I find it to be rational, unlike the people in the Off-Topic board. I'm not saying you're acting disrespectful.

My main issue with Druckmann right now is that his games can turn into Bioware's, where they're all about the propaganda and political expression. I'm worried that there will become a day where already-established characters will magically become lesbians and/or trans in the next game. Things that wouldn't be as much of an issue if they were introduced as such and/or their sexualities wouldn't be their defining characteristics. Overall, I think conservatives play their games for their stories, but will jump ship once they get too "preachy", and alienate them more (but I don't think it's the "conservatives" who are "harassing" them with their critiques, because the left doesn't even know what a conservative even is anymore, it's like they've lost the difference between Tea Party Republicans and moderate conservatives).

 

[Roni]

I don't really mind a developer pursuing an agenda. They're doing their own thing and if that thing is interesting enough, then fair enough. Ellie being gay is of no relevance to The Last of Us, love is love and if I'm male and straight, all I gotta do is meet them halfway imagining Ellie probably feels the way I feel about my girlfriend and that's the end of that.

 

[Cactuarman]

This is one of the only posts that I have trouble replying with. Not because there's so much to digest and reply to, but quite the opposite because I find it to be rational, unlike the people in the Off-Topic board. I'm not saying you're acting disrespectful.

Appreciate the response. I always feel like these threads are simultaneously really interesting but also really frustrating - not frustrating because I disagree with something, but frustrating because they often get very emotional and peoples' points (or peoples' interpretations of points) become muddy.

My main issue with Druckmann right now is that his games can turn into Bioware's, where they're all about the propaganda and political expression. I'm worried that there will become a day where already-established characters will magically become lesbians and/or trans in the next game. Things that wouldn't be as much of an issue if they were introduced as such and/or their sexualities wouldn't be their defining characteristics.

Totally fine to feel that way but I guess my point would be that ultimately you're talking about your preference and your concerns. I mean sure, maybe Zelda will suddenly become gay and go off on an adventure to save Zeldle or something (side note: Linkle is a really stupid name) and I would agree that would seem a bit forced. But as someone who has played 30+ years as Link I'd be pretty excited for a Zelda focused game.

I don't think Druckmann or even Bioware is anywhere near that above example. A lot of this thread seems to argue that Ellie is too "in your face" or "forced." Whereas for me it just seems like Ellie's relationship is being treated like any other straight relationship. I mean, yeah, Druckmann's agenda does involve showcasing Ellie being a lesbian BUT in order to normalize something we have to SEE something. So yeah, Ellie is gay, here's a gay kiss, now here's Ellie killing a bunch of people. Sounds good to me.

Also, and no offense, to me calling Bioware games "propaganda" is gross hyperbole that only serves misrepresent Bioware's goals while at the same time lessening the meaning of actual propaganda. Bioware wants diversity in their games - character options, romance options, NPC interactions, etc. Diversity. Period. They aren't misrepresenting anything. They're not portraying straight white men as lessor idiots while black trans gay women are saviors or something. Bioware literally just has gay romance options. Dragon Age just has a trans character who, at one point, subtly talks about being trans.

Overall, I think conservatives play their games for their stories, but will jump ship once they get too "preachy", and alienate them more (but I don't think it's the "conservatives" who are "harassing" them with their critiques, because the left doesn't even know what a conservative even is anymore, it's like they've lost the difference between Tea Party Republicans and moderate conservatives).

I think you're right with the first part. And ultimately you're probably right in that many progressives don't know the general differences between the two (other than maybe knowing that the Tea Party is less moderate than the moderates). All I can say is that to me it doesn't really matter in this case - I would disagree with both a Tea Party Republican or a moderate conservative who is arguing what Druckmann should or shouldn't do with his time.

 

[Hotel Security]

This is what folks get when they "play games for the plot." When you want plot made by 20-somethings with no writing skills, you get plot made by 20-somethings with no writing skills. This is why we don't turn to video games for good story since it's always done in a sloppy and obvious way with no subtlety...because they don't trust their younger audience to understand something that is only implied.

Play games for the gameplay and let's stop worrying about these cookie-cutter storylines and their agendas. There's far better sources of fiction out there anyway. I don't know why so many gamers obsess about the one thing that games do worse than all the other artforms.

 

[HaveButOneLife]

Totally fine to feel that way but I guess my point would be that ultimately you're talking about your preference and your concerns. I mean sure, maybe Zelda will suddenly become gay and go off on an adventure to save Zeldle or something (side note: Linkle is a really stupid name) and I would agree that would seem a bit forced. But as someone who has played 30+ years as Link I'd be pretty excited for a Zelda focused game.

Of course it's all of our preferences and our concerns to be fair, but we're not talking about subtle changes, here. Who knows? Maybe in the future it'll get so bad to the point where it becomes even more impractical, that there are even more women and they out-populate men by a significant amount. Then I don't think it's about subjectivity, at that point. Really I don't think we're talking about subjectivity at all, but what'll happen to our games if we allow this to continue or get worse.

As for Zelda, I do like that idea, but only because it makes sense to her character. She's not just some random nobody, she's a personification of a goddess so her power makes sense.

I don't think Druckmann or even Bioware is anywhere near that above example. A lot of this thread seems to argue that Ellie is too "in your face" or "forced." Whereas for me it just seems like Ellie's relationship is being treated like any other straight relationship. I mean, yeah, Druckmann's agenda does involve showcasing Ellie being a lesbian BUT in order to normalize something we have to SEE something. So yeah, Ellie is gay, here's a gay kiss, now here's Ellie killing a bunch of people. Sounds good to me.

I personally couldn't care less if Ellie's gay, heck, I don't even think her relationship was forced because she was already established as homosexual/bisexual in the Left Behind DLC, not in spite of it. Although I do feel that it was merely inappropriate to have a somewhat "makeout" at a public event, but to me I would have felt the same about a straight couple. Irrational people will say that's not true. It's not her specifically that I'm worried about, because her character feels more subtle to me. Her abilities as a survivor in a post-apocalyptic world makes sense, even if she was and/or wasn't stronger than the men she was killing.

Also, and no offense, to me calling Bioware games "propaganda" is gross hyperbole that only serves misrepresent Bioware's goals while at the same time lessening the meaning of actual propaganda. Bioware wants diversity in their games - character options, romance options, NPC interactions, etc. Diversity. Period. They aren't misrepresenting anything. They're not portraying straight white men as lessor idiots while black trans gay women are saviors or something. Bioware literally just has gay romance options. Dragon Age just has a trans character who, at one point, subtly talks about being trans.

I don't think Bioware was a great example, either, and I admit that it was the best example that we got because their politics are so insane, not because of any substantial political influence in their games, but because they give their players choice without alienating certain demographics, so they can hold those crazy beliefs without negatively impacting the gaming industry unless they actually allow their personal politics to influence them. Druckmann and/or Naughty Dog in general is not doing this, he's or they're saying, or will potentially imply, "screw our Republican fans". That's where I'll personally draw the line, and that's where the criticism is most important.

I think you're right with the first part. And ultimately you're probably right in that many progressives don't know the general differences between the two (other than maybe knowing that the Tea Party is less moderate than the moderates). All I can say is that to me it doesn't really matter in this case - I would disagree with both a Tea Party Republican or a moderate conservative who is arguing what Druckmann should or shouldn't do with his time.

I do feel like they have every right to criticize him if they feel that he's going too far, that personal politics can become propaganda, or even - hypothetically - brainwashing, if they allow it to get bad enough (I'm not saying that pixels can influence behavior, but that other people on social media can).

 

[Cactuarman]

Of course it's all of our preferences and our concerns to be fair, but we're not talking about subtle changes, here. Who knows? Maybe in the future it'll get so bad to the point where it becomes even more impractical, that there are even more women and they out-populate men by a significant amount. Then I don't think it's about subjectivity, at that point. Really I don't think we're talking about subjectivity at all, but what'll happen to our games if we allow this to continue or get worse.

Probably didn't articulate this super well - my problem with this thread (in a broad sense) was the mixture of personal preference/interpretation with what Naughty Dog should or shouldn't do. I understand the fear that the trend may get worse but I guess I'm saying that I don't think that will happen (just my opinion though). It is possible that you may one day have to say goodbye to Druckmann-led games which would be unfortunate. Hopefully at that point though there would still be plenty of things to play. Obviously can't say for sure though.

Although I do feel that it was merely inappropriate to have a somewhat "makeout" at a public event, but to me I would have felt the same about a straight couple. Irrational people will say that's not true. It's not her specifically that I'm worried about, because her character feels more subtle to me. Her abilities as a survivor in a post-apocalyptic world makes sense, even if she was and/or wasn't stronger than the men she was killing.

Fair enough, pretty much agree here though I liked the trailer.

I don't think Bioware was a great example, either, and I admit that it was the best example that we got because their politics are so insane, not because of any substantial political influence in their games, but because they give their players choice without alienating certain demographics, so they can hold those crazy beliefs without negatively impacting the gaming industry unless they actually allow their personal politics to influence them. Druckmann and/or Naughty Dog in general is not doing this, he's or they're saying, or will potentially imply, "screw our Republican fans". That's where I'll personally draw the line, and that's where the criticism is most important.

True but I don't think you NEED to have choice simply to avoid alienation. Actually, I don't even think alienation is a big deal. The existence of a game with gay characters about gay problems is great. I may give it a shot, I may not. Had Gone Home been overtly promoted as a game about a teenager discovering that she was gay (or at least bi) who knows how that would impact sales, but making that story about a straight girl and her first boyfriend would have really lessened that story's impact. If even one person is moved by Gone Home then it's probably done exactly what the developers wanted it to do (well, realistically I'm sure they'd want to move many people and I think they've done that).

Would agree that "screw our Republican fans" is a pretty fair line to draw. Unless it's overtly said I think it would be more about policy but I don't want to speculate too much.

I do feel like they have every right to criticize him if they feel that he's going too far, that personal politics can become propaganda, or even - hypothetically - brainwashing, if they allow it to get bad enough (I'm not saying that pixels can influence behavior, but that other people on social media can).

For sure, they definitely can. Again though like what does "too far" mean? What is his agenda trying to accomplish? To me we're still so comically far from actual propaganda and brainwashing that I don't even like bringing it up.

Also just wanted to say that I really appreciate the chill and rational discussion.

 

[HaveButOneLife]

Probably didn't articulate this super well - my problem with this thread (in a broad sense) was the mixture of personal preference/interpretation with what Naughty Dog should or shouldn't do. I understand the fear that the trend may get worse but I guess I'm saying that I don't think that will happen (just my opinion though). It is possible that you may one day have to say goodbye to Druckmann-led games which would be unfortunate. Hopefully at that point though there would still be plenty of things to play. Obviously can't say for sure though.

I wouldn't want it to lead Druckmann quitting Naughty Dog, either. What do I have to gain from it? I think in that particular scenario, things would get misconstrued and he'd leave because he personally thought that people were "wanting to change his mind" about his pretty crazy SJW politics, but I definitely don't want to wish the worst for them. I think all that people are arguing here are making sure that their favorite games succeed and feel that their favorite studio is disrespecting them. Me, personally, I don't like linear games but that's a different beast of a discussion entirely.

What I don't like is the fact that people who are on Naughty Dog's defense are trying to say that people like me are trying to tell artists what to do with their art. That's simply not the case, and is really a cop-out to the issue.

Fair enough, pretty much agree here though I liked the trailer.

I thought it looked visually stunning, and always felt that The Last of Us's gameplay was, although grounded, very smooth with some nice open-ended maps, but lacked replayability and thought that it felt like a chore to play. In this particular instance, I saw no political agenda being shoehorned in; I thought it was a good representation of the non-faked (lol at the people saying that it was) gameplay, and thought that Ellie using her wits/training against the grunts in the trailer was practical, unlike Nadine in Uncharted 4.

True but I don't think you NEED to have choice simply to avoid alienation. Actually, I don't even think alienation is a big deal. The existence of a game with gay characters about gay problems is great. I may give it a shot, I may not. Had Gone Home been overtly promoted as a game about a teenager discovering that she was gay (or at least bi) who knows how that would impact sales, but making that story about a straight girl and her first boyfriend would have really lessened that story's impact. If even one person is moved by Gone Home then it's probably done exactly what the developers wanted it to do (well, realistically I'm sure they'd want to move many people and I think they've done that).

My issue was more with Nadine vs. Nathan and Sam Drake in Uncharted 4 than Ellie being gay in The Last of Us 2, because unlike Ellie's sexuality, Nadine wasn't established at the time until The Lost Legacy (which sounds like a better game than Uncharted 4 to me, but I haven't played it yet). But in terms of alienation, I can't agree on that. When I become a game developer in the future, I definitely don't want to alienate playerbases, SJW progressives or not. That's really all this thread comes down to, is alienating non-progressive Naughty Dog fans, or just flat-out disrespecting them and saying that their opinion has no value, because that's how you lose millions of them. I'm fine with The Last of Us and Gone Home characters being gay, but having flat-out crazy SJW opinions (especially in terms of the Gone Home developers) and attacking general non-leftist fans and slandering them as alt-right fanatics is not welcomed in my book.

Would agree that "screw our Republican fans" is a pretty fair line to draw. Unless it's overtly said I think it would be more about policy but I don't want to speculate too much.

I do remember Neil Druckmann saying "no can do" to a fan on Twitter asking them to tone down their political agenda to a certain gentlemen last year, and what Druckmann didn't understand was the fact that that sort of crap can lead to harassment in and of itself. That's not a big deal and it's not disrespectful by any means, but it does mean that they're not valuing their non-leftist fans and it may or may not lead to behavior akin to disrespect in the future. If it's not them doing it, then his buddy Anita Sarkeesian and Naughty Dog's rabid SJW fans will.

Can't we all just get along?

For sure, they definitely can. Again though like what does "too far" mean? What is his agenda trying to accomplish? To me we're still so comically far from actual propaganda and brainwashing that I don't even like bringing it up.

Going too far means turning the "Chloe x Nadine" couple "meme" into a reality, even though they were established as straight - or overpopulating women characters - or disrespecting conservative fans for simply voting for Trump. It can mean pretty much anything at this point. I do know for certain that he can potentially try to make women characters super impractical and overpowered for "muh feminism" instead of making them good overall characters. But, it can potentially be even worse, I'm afraid.

Also just wanted to say that I really appreciate the chill and rational discussion.

+respect

Likewise, it's fantastic and needs to happen more often. Forget the namecalling and slanderous labels/rhetoric coming from extremists, this open dialogue was much, much needed and as long as this continues then I hope this thread stays open for as long as possible.

 

[Cactuarman]

HaveButOneLife We don't agree on everything but your rational makes sense, to the point where I don't really even have the urge to try to counter any of your points - I understand where you're coming from and I respect your viewpoint.

I do remember Neil Druckmann saying "no can do" to a fan on Twitter asking them to tone down their political agenda to a certain gentlemen last year, and what Druckmann didn't understand was the fact that that sort of crap can lead to harassment in and of itself. That's not a big deal and it's not disrespectful by any means, but it does mean that they're not valuing their non-leftist fans and it may or may not lead to behavior akin to disrespect in the future. If it's not them doing it, then his buddy Anita Sarkeesian and Naughty Dog's rabid SJW fans will.

Not disagreeing but I do think it's interesting to think about how overly hostile language can breed overly hostile defensiveness - on both sides. The two of us can rationally talk, understand the points being made, and then sort of virtually shake hands. No actual clue how Druckmann is as a person (and I don't like Anita at all) but I can sort of imagine him saying "no can do" in response to someone who he perceives as being a dick. I don't know. Druckmann could be an asshole. I don't actually know. Just a thought.

Ultimately I'm agreeing with you that harassment leads to harassment. Just acknowledging that it can be either offensive or defensive.

 

[HaveButOneLife]

HaveButOneLife We don't agree on everything but your rational makes sense, to the point where I don't really even have the urge to try to counter any of your points - I understand where you're coming from and I respect your viewpoint.



Not disagreeing but I do think it's interesting to think about how overly hostile language can breed overly hostile defensiveness - on both sides. The two of us can rationally talk, understand the points being made, and then sort of virtually shake hands. No actual clue how Druckmann is as a person (and I don't like Anita at all) but I can sort of imagine him saying "no can do" in response to someone who he perceives as being a dick. I don't know. Druckmann could be an asshole. I don't actually know. Just a thought.

Ultimately I'm agreeing with you that harassment leads to harassment. Just acknowledging that it can be either offensive or defensive.

I very much appreciate it. Again, this is a rare case of two people getting along, and I wish the internet - especially social media - was more like how this is right now.

Druckmann was the jerk in that situation. I just didn't remember the full tweet, this is it:

No can do. Writers work off of their views of the world. For example, the ending of TLoU is very much inspired by my "personal politics."

But I guess I just made it a bigger deal, however to me this came off as pompous, as if he can put whatever propaganda he wants in his games, telling whatever fans doesn't approve of it to screw off. It is what it is.

 

[idontlikeusernames]

Just watched the vid for the first time. Yeah, I'll not be buying any more Naughty Dog crap. I've been playing vidya since I was 5 years old, and I never cared if there was a woman, gay or black guy in a game, and then they shove an agenda in my face and scream at me that I'm an embarrassment when I see it? Yeah.....no.

SJWs indeed.

 

[Marshmallow]

Just watched the vid for the first time. Yeah, I'll not be buying any more Naughty Dog crap. I've been playing vidya since I was 5 years old, and I never cared if there was a woman, gay or black guy in a game, and then they shove an agenda in my face and scream at me that I'm an embarrassment when I see it? Yeah.....no.

SJWs indeed.

"I don't care, so let me tell you how much I care it goes against my beliefs"

What are you people trying to fool exactly?

 

[JimmyRustler]

"I don't care, so let me tell you how much I care it goes against my beliefs"

What are you people trying to fool exactly?

Apparently you who fails to differentiate between forced and intended.

 

[idontlikeusernames]

"I don't care, so let me tell you how much I care it goes against my beliefs"

What are you people trying to fool exactly?

I don't know what you're trying to say.

Whatever though. I won't be buying games from lunatic SJWs who scream about people like me who just want to play video games without some gay agenda shoved in. I'm a straight male, and seeing an action game with 2 lesbians sniffing each other isn't appealing to me. No need to boycott, I'm just not interested. Plenty of other games coming out without this cancer in them.

 

[Shai-Tan]

Pursuing an agenda would be something like having her being cartoonishly persecuted for being gay. Merely having (well written) gay characters is perspective taking unless you think gay people should be persecuted or at least not accepted for their sexual orientation in which case maybe he's right to have an "agenda"

edit: I should add a lot of this conversation seems to be affected by fear mongering about "sjws" and "progressives" (on hyperpartisan media and youtube) which turns basic things like respect for fellow humans into a tribal war. I notice this when I engage with some communities that are hypersensitive to a "sjw agenda" that they see in every unreleased game with a "nontraditional" protagonist or theme, to then have to grudgingly accept that e.g. no, Horizon Zero Dawn was not some ideological trojan horse. I've seen nothing in Naughty Dog writing to suggest this won't also be the case.

 

[prag16]

I don't know what you're trying to say.

Whatever though. I won't be buying games from lunatic SJWs who scream about people like me who just want to play video games without some gay agenda shoved in. I'm a straight male, and seeing an action game with 2 lesbians sniffing each other isn't appealing to me. No need to boycott, I'm just not interested. Plenty of other games coming out without this cancer in them.

That's not even the problem most people in this thread have though. You frankly sound pretty homophobic. The issue isn't the lesbians in the game. It's the apparent huge laser focus on this aspect at E3, and pairing that with Druckmann's other comments, his relationship with Anita, etc, this justifies concerns that ND is more worried about showing how woke they are than simply making a good game.

Of course it's not either/or. The game can and probably still will be good. It's just not encouraging to see where there priorities apparently lay.

 

[mckmas8808]

Pursuing an agenda would be something like having her being cartoonishly persecuted for being gay. Merely having (well written) gay characters is perspective taking unless you think gay people should be persecuted or at least not accepted for their sexual orientation in which case maybe he's right to have an "agenda"

edit: I should add a lot of this conversation seems to be affected by fear mongering about "sjws" and "progressives" (on hyperpartisan media and youtube) which turns basic things like respect for fellow humans into a tribal war. I notice this when I engage with some communities that are hypersensitive to a "sjw agenda" that they see in every unreleased game with a "nontraditional" protagonist or theme, to then have to grudgingly accept that e.g. no, Horizon Zero Dawn was not some ideological trojan horse. I've seen nothing in Naughty Dog writing to suggest this won't also be the case.

You have this thread and alot of these discussions 100% correct! It's sad, but it's humanity. It's how we've always been as people.

 

[idontlikeusernames]

That's not even the problem most people in this thread have though. You frankly sound pretty homophobic. The issue isn't the lesbians in the game. It's the apparent huge laser focus on this aspect at E3, and pairing that with Druckmann's other comments, his relationship with Anita, etc, this justifies concerns that ND is more worried about showing how woke they are than simply making a good game.

Of course it's not either/or. The game can and probably still will be good. It's just not encouraging to see where there priorities apparently lay.

I don't hate gays, I hate leftists who scream about gays. Gays like Dave Rubin and James Randi are fine with me.

 

[Marshmallow]

Apparently you who fails to differentiate between forced and intended.

Ah yes, forced, the other buzzword you love to use like it makes any sense. Forced! Shoved down my throat! Agenda! SJW! Harr harr, if I repeat these words enough times, an argument will come off!

I don't hate gays, I hate leftists who scream about gays. Gays like Dave Rubin and James Randi are fine with me.

"I don't hate gays, I just think any example of same-sex intimacy is SHOVING THE GAY AGENDA DOWN MY THROAT and cancer".

Again, who are you trying to fool? Yourself? You are clearly homophobic, at least live up to it rathern than trying to hide behind buzzwords.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

This is something I truly couldn't care less about. I don't have any biases or any agendas. I just enjoy good characters and good stories. I can enjoy a gay love story just as much as a straight one, and same-sex love story as much as an interracial one. It's the quality of the writing, acting (or voice acting), character development etc. that matter to me. I'm a straight, white male if that matters for context.

That said, I am glad we're seeing more games, movies, shows etc. with gay leads, minority leads and so on as it's nice for those people to have more mainstream characters to relate to after mainstream media being made primarily for people like me for so long.

 

[JimmyRustler]

Ah yes, forced, the other buzzword you love to use like it makes any sense. Forced! Shoved down my throat! Agenda! SJW! Harr harr, if I repeat these words enough times, an argument will come off!

Damn, you're so edgy man, if I continue to talk to you I may just cut myself.

 

[mckmas8808]

This is something I truly couldn't care less about. I don't have any biases or any agendas. I just enjoy good characters and good stories. I can enjoy a gay love story just as much as a straight one, and same-sex love story as much as an interracial one. It's the quality of the writing, acting (or voice acting), character development etc. that matter to me. I'm a straight, white male if that matters for context.

That said, I am glad we're seeing more games, movies, shows etc. with gay leads, minority leads and so on as it's nice for those people to have more mainstream characters to relate to after mainstream media being made primarily for people like me for so long.

I couldn't agree more. 100% on point.

 

[idontlikeusernames]

Ah yes, forced, the other buzzword you love to use like it makes any sense. Forced! Shoved down my throat! Agenda! SJW! Harr harr, if I repeat these words enough times, an argument will come off!


"I don't hate gays, I just think any example of same-sex intimacy is SHOVING THE GAY AGENDA DOWN MY THROAT and cancer".

Again, who are you trying to fool? Yourself? You are clearly homophobic, at least live up to it rathern than trying to hide behind buzzwords.

So I should WANT to play as a butch lesbian who sniffs other lesbians with an admitted agenda shoved in, is that what you are trying to say? Should I want to go to gay bars too and watch guys make out? Does not wanting to see that make me a bigot as well? What about gay pride parades in my street? Should I love those too? How about mentally ill transgendered people, should I want those people teaching my children dilation? If not being interested in certain things make me a homophobe bigot, then so be it.

Yeah, you leftists have a hell of a sense of entitlement. You don't want acceptance, you want to force everyone to love everything you do. Have your gay game, it's fine by me, but I don't find it appealing.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

So I should WANT to play as a butch lesbian who sniffs other lesbians with an admitted agenda shoved in, is that what you are trying to say? Should I want to go to gay bars too and watch guys make out? Does not wanting to see that make me a bigot as well? What about gay pride parades in my street? Should I love those too? How about mentally ill transgendered people, should I want those people teaching my children dilation? If not being interested in certain things make me a homophobe bigot, then so be it.

Yeah, you leftists have a hell of a sense of entitlement. You don't want acceptance, you want to force everyone to love everything you do. Have your gay game, it's fine by me, but I don't find it appealing.

You're absolutely free to not like those things, not buy those types of games, not go to gay bars, parades etc. Nothing wrong with that.

The problem is when people try to pressure devs to not make games with gay leads, to get gay bars shut down or gay parades canceled.

A majority of content and events are still catered toward heterosexuals first and foremost. It's not like you're starving for games with straight leads, or non-gay pride parades etc. Enjoy what you enjoy, and let others do the same--especially marginalized groups who were starving for content with people like them in lead roles for most of their lives until recent years.

 

[idontlikeusernames]

You're absolutely free to not like those things, not buy those types of games, not go to gay bars, parades etc. Nothing wrong with that.

The problem is when people try to pressure devs to not make games with gay leads, to get gay bars shut down or gay parades canceled.

A majority of content and events are still catered toward heterosexuals first and foremost. It's not like you're starving for games with straight leads, or non-gay pride parades etc. Enjoy what you enjoy, and let others do the same--especially marginalized groups who were starving for content with people like them in lead roles for most of their lives until recent years.

If gays want to have videogames for them, that's fine by me, I don't find them appealing, just like I don't like reading romance novels. Hilarious though the left now wants to have the freedom to make them though after pressuring devs to stop making the types of games I like though. Just amazing.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

If gays want to have videogames for them, that's fine by me, I don't find them appealing, just like I don't like reading romance novels. Hilarious though the left now wants to have the freedom to make them though after pressuring devs to stop making the types of games I like though. Just amazing.

I sort of agree with that. No one should pressure devs to not make any type of game. Just don't buy things that don't appeal to you, it's that simple.

I do understand marginalized groups asking for games featuring leads like them after decades of getting few or no games of those types. No reason to attack people making games aimed primarily at straight white males though. As long as they're getting games with gay and/or minority leads they can play those and skip say the next Dead or Alive, while you play whatever games you like and skip the gay themed games.

 

[The Skull]

You're absolutely free to not like those things, not buy those types of games, not go to gay bars, parades etc. Nothing wrong with that.

The problem is when people try to pressure devs to not make games with gay leads, to get gay bars shut down or gay parades canceled.

A majority of content and events are still catered toward heterosexuals first and foremost. It's not like you're starving for games with straight leads, or non-gay pride parades etc. Enjoy what you enjoy, and let others do the same--especially marginalized groups who were starving for content with people like them in lead roles for most of their lives until recent years.

Dev's get an equal amount of shade thrown at them when they have a straight male in the lead. The amount of times I've seen "ughhh, another white male" in response to games being shown off is overwhelming. The issue is that games have now been wound up so tightly in identity politics. If you don't have a lead from a marginalized group in, you're a bigot. If you do, you're an SJW with an agenda.

The issue with ND is that they seem to be recruiting people solely based off their ideoligcal beliefs. Hence the idiot in the video that's tweeting about "STRAIGHT ISN'T THE DEFAULT SEXUALITY" or making sexist remarks against white men, or the female interviewer that knows nothing about games. They're creating their own echo chamber, whilst alienating their own fan base to a degree, and it will be interesting at least to see how that plays out with TLOU2

 

[Deleted member 752119]

Dev's get an equal amount of shade thrown at them when they have a straight male in the lead. The amount of times I've seen "ughhh, another white male" in response to games being shown off is overwhelming. The issue is that games have now been wound up so tightly in identity politics. If you don't have a lead from a marginalized group in, you're a bigot. If you do, you're an SJW with an agenda.

The issue with ND is that they seem to be recruiting people solely based off their ideoligcal beliefs. Hence the idiot in the video that's tweeting about "STRAIGHT ISN'T THE DEFAULT SEXUALITY" or making sexist remarks against white men, or the female interviewer that knows nothing about games. They're creating their own echo chamber, whilst alienating their own fan base to a degree, and it will be interesting at least to see how that plays out with TLOU2

To the first, I have no problem with people just expressing dislike of a lead--be it someone not wanting another straight white or a straight person not wanting a gay lead. People just shouldn't organize twitter campaigns, petitions etc. to try to strong arm artists to changing things to suit their views IMO. People certainly have the right to do so, I just find it hypocritical when people use their free speech/freedom of expression to try to constrain other's freedom of expression. Again, it's easy enough to just express dislike and skip products that don't appeal to you.

To the second, again I strongly support freedom of speech and expression. If Naughty Dog wants to focus more on representing marginalized populations in their games, more power to them. I agree it will be interesting to see how it pans out in sales for TLOU2--but I think as long as it's a good game and reviews well it will sell gangbusters. It's not like it's going to be gay porn and have hot lesibian sex scenes that may turn off some. The vast majority of people can ignore gay themes when it's little more than kissing and innuendo. The ones that can't aren't some huge portion of the market IMO--especially for TLOU which has had these themes since the DLC for the first game.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Dev's get an equal amount of shade thrown at them when they have a straight male in the lead. The amount of times I've seen "ughhh, another white male" in response to games being shown off is overwhelming. The issue is that games have now been wound up so tightly in identity politics. If you don't have a lead from a marginalized group in, you're a bigot. If you do, you're an SJW with an agenda.

The issue with ND is that they seem to be recruiting people solely based off their ideoligcal beliefs. Hence the idiot in the video that's tweeting about "STRAIGHT ISN'T THE DEFAULT SEXUALITY" or making sexist remarks against white men, or the female interviewer that knows nothing about games. They're creating their own echo chamber, whilst alienating their own fan base to a degree, and it will be interesting at least to see how that plays out with TLOU2

I can see this argument, but I also think they know the average casual gamer is not getting caught up on the identity politics online, and the game will sell huge regardless based on the name and pedigree of the developer to that majority alone. That is why they can get away with having the abrasive attitude. And I used to stick up for ND every turn, but some of those tweets seem to come from a place of arrogance because they know this (sales wise).

 

[idontlikeusernames]

I can see this argument, but I also think they know the average casual gamer is not getting caught up on the identity politics online, and the game will sell huge regardless based on the name and pedigree of the developer to that majority alone. That is why they can get away with having the abrasive attitude. And I used to stick up for ND every turn, but some of those tweets seem to come from a place of arrogance because they know this (sales wise).

If they're that proud, they should put their stance on the box of the game. Something like this. "If you don't love homosexual agendas and Anita Sarkeesian, you are an embarrassment and we don't want you to buy the game. We didn't make it for you. Oh, and punch Nazi Drumpf supporters."

 

[DeepEnigma]

If they're that proud, they should put their stance on the box of the game. Something like this. "If you don't love homosexual agendas and Anita Sarkeesian, you are an embarrassment and we don't want you to buy the game. We didn't make it for you. Oh, and punch Nazi Drumpf supporters."

Ok, this gave me a chuckle.

 

[VulcanRaven]

So I should WANT to play as a butch lesbian who sniffs other lesbians with an admitted agenda shoved in, is that what you are trying to say? Should I want to go to gay bars too and watch guys make out? Does not wanting to see that make me a bigot as well? What about gay pride parades in my street? Should I love those too? How about mentally ill transgendered people, should I want those people teaching my children dilation? If not being interested in certain things make me a homophobe bigot, then so be it.

Yeah, you leftists have a hell of a sense of entitlement. You don't want acceptance, you want to force everyone to love everything you do. Have your gay game, it's fine by me, but I don't find it appealing.

So would play the game if the main character wasn't gay? What if Ellie was kissing a guy in the trailer? I think people should give the game a chance if they liked the previous game. Also I don't think Ellie will be kissing all the time in the game. That might be just a small part of the story.

 

[Danjin44]

So would play the game if the main character wasn't gay? What if Ellie was kissing a guy in the trailer? I think people should give the game a chance if they liked the previous game. Also I don't think Ellie will be kissing all the time in the game. That might be just a small part of the game and story.

I agree. To me playing as gay character is no different than playing as female or male and gay character expressing his/her love is no different than what you see normal couple expressing their love in movies and games. We are 19 pages to this thread I still don't really understand whats big deal about Ellie being gay? Some people say the game wont "appeal" to them because they are not gay....so does that mean I shouldn't like games that has female lead just because I'm not female myself? What is logic to that? Shouldn't we care more about the actual character is good or not rather than their gender and sexuality?

 

[Schrödinger's cat]

If they're that proud, they should put their stance on the box of the game. Something like this. "If you don't love homosexual agendas and Anita Sarkeesian, you are an embarrassment and we don't want you to buy the game. We didn't make it for you. Oh, and punch Nazi Drumpf supporters."

Those sentiments were broadly expressed in at least one tweet from a Naughty Dog developer.
This is detailed in the video that this entire thread is based upon. If anyone hasn't watched it, it's well worth viewing in order to see how much substance is being put forward into the argument presented.

I have yet to see anyone, on any side of the debate, directly address the fact that Naughty Dog hand-picked an actor with a history of bigotry in their twitter posts.
For me, this is the single most worrying detail brought to light. And the silence around it is deafening.

My view is that you can't address prejudice by employing more prejudice. That isn't progress.

 

[Cactuarman]

If gays want to have videogames for them, that's fine by me, I don't find them appealing, just like I don't like reading romance novels. Hilarious though the left now wants to have the freedom to make them though after pressuring devs to stop making the types of games I like though. Just amazing.

I find nothing objectionable about the first part of this, but can you humor me and give me some examples on the second part so we can talk to them? I feel like there is a lot of vagueness in some of this thread and I'd like to push for more specifics when I can. I'm on the left and have advocated throughout this thread that developers should be able to produce whatever story/content/game they want.

Are we talking pressure via stating their opinions either verbally or monetarily? Or something worse?

 

[Windom Earle]

If Sony stays hooked on the SJW kool aid I might switch to MS or just go PC only next gen. Well, GoW 4 happened, so not sure how MS will turn out.

 

[DeepEnigma]

If Sony stays hooked on the SJW kool aid I might switch to MS or just go PC only next gen. Well, GoW 4 happened, so not sure how MS will turn out.

Have you read Stinkles posts?

 

[Windom Earle]

Have you read Stinkles posts?

Still have hope MS will fire him eventually so he can stop ruining Halo. Maybe I am too optimistic.

 

[InterMusketeer]

Some people say the game wont "appeal" to them because they are not gay....so does that mean I shouldn't like games that has female lead just because I'm not female myself? What is logic to that? Shouldn't we care more about the actual character is good or not rather than their gender and sexuality?

If their gender and sexuality is one of the major aspects of their character that's being explored, then yes, it can be something one may care about. There's plenty of characters I'm not interested in. I wouldn't be interested in playing an alcoholic either. If the game specifically dives into that subject, it's not gonna appeal to me.

 

[Danjin44]

If their gender and sexuality is one of the major aspects of their character that's being explored, then yes, it can be something one may care about. There's plenty of characters I'm not interested in. I wouldn't be interested in playing an alcoholic either. If the game specifically dives into that subject, it's not gonna appeal to me.

I personally I don't mind playing as alcoholic if the character is interesting and explore why he/she became that way. Again I care far more about the actual character development. I dont even care if the character is not "likeable" but as long it interesting and has nice character development then I can still enjoy it.

 

[Negotiator]

Does anyone else think that Quantic Dream is the only non-SJW, Sony-affiliated studio right now, or is it just me?

I know they're not owned by Sony (like ND/GG/SM), but they still make PS4 exclusives, so they must have Sony's approval, right?

I'm glad Detroit didn't have any forced SJW agenda (ugly masculinized female faces, too much focus on LGBT politics, "toxic" masculinity and stuff like that). Yeah, it had an LGBT moment (not gonna spoil it, don't worry), but it was very subtle and it definitely wasn't the "showcase" of E3 2015. That's how things should be done (no wonder SJWs are mad about this game!).

 

[mckmas8808]

Does anyone else think that Quantic Dream is the only non-SJW, Sony-affiliated studio right now, or is it just me?

I know they're not owned by Sony (like ND/GG/SM), but they still make PS4 exclusives, so they must have Sony's approval, right?

I'm glad Detroit didn't have any forced SJW agenda (ugly masculinized female faces, too much focus on LGBT politics, "toxic" masculinity and stuff like that). Yeah, it had an LGBT moment (not gonna spoil it, don't worry), but it was very subtle and it definitely wasn't the "showcase" of E3 2015. That's how things should be done (no wonder SJWs are mad about this game!).

It's just you.

 

[Damien Crowley]

If their gender and sexuality is one of the major aspects of their character that's being explored, then yes, it can be something one may care about. There's plenty of characters I'm not interested in. I wouldn't be interested in playing an alcoholic either. If the game specifically dives into that subject, it's not gonna appeal to me.

Just out of curiosity: Did you play the Max Payne Series and if, did you like it?