The Representation Tweet
Comments
-
First broadly speaking identiy politics is something I wildly disagree with.
And LGBT is two different political ideologys with both gender and sexualty being admittedly somewhat related but independent of each other.
Advocating for representives based on arbitrary traits is to ascribe agenda and classify that trait as a collective instead of individuals. I know doing so creates stereo types and other harmful products that divide.
I disagree that x looking individuals or x sexualty active people together what something.
I would say that a person who happens to be x would want something.
Nextly
To call for representation of these groups as thread has is, to support and endorse these groups Possitively. I make that assumption because if it was negatively representative it would in practice be to say "this lbgt charater was sent to the fog for there wicked deeds of...same sex sleeping" or something. So I think we can all agree we only want positive endorsement.
To positively endorse lgb
You have to support and believe sexualty doesn't matter, this belive while personally I find very enjoyable myself is harmful for reproduction and the social balance of building strong family units to produce well rounded individuals. Not everything is clear cut good and bad and until social engineering can solve the issues that are created by the repercussions of ideals they shouldn't be blindly supported.
To support T
is another headache entirely.
Does gender matter ? Should gender matter ? If there are no differences between the sexes whatsoever then sports bathrooms fields of medicine wouldn't exist. Can we get LeBron join the women's league to score 489 points a game? or dismantle women's leagues altogether and force them out by male dominated athletes.. sure some will make it and even outperform men but not many. The world isn't functionally ready to let go of gender.
Now if it does matter...and we know its biological for a fact... is it all mental or chemical imbalance? the scary questions come up next. Is transgender something wrong to be cured? The same technology that could be used to help people transition could also be used to stop it... thats some spooky stuff I don't want to touch.
Do we try to help people with dismorpha settle into there own body's or do we try to change body's... thats tuff to say. And I know my friend struggles with that choice for what will be their entire life. And the treatments are brutal.
So i can't say id promote that positively... i can't say I'd tell people or children that being these things are fun or acceptable when they might need help instead and I know T has been corrosive to women's rights movement and organizations and technology and therapy just isn't there to support these poor souls. And society isn't functionally built for it in either language law or any system we are very geared for gender in the world.
I think going for neutrality is best. To say it doesn't matter what you like or who you love you can be yourself without labels and speak and think the way you want without a group doing it for you
2 -
Forgive me, but I don't have the time to debate you on all those wrong assumptions, like the notion that LGBT families don't produce well-rounded individuals. I appreciate the effort you went to, though.
Bottom line, all the devs are doing is confirming which characters are LGBT and which are not. This is an expansion of the lore and is no more a political statement about LGBT than having women is about feminism or having black people is about BLM. They'd already been doing this for heterosexual characters, so LGBT characters should get the same treatment. This is equality (or neutrality, as you put it). It's treating LGBT people the same as non-LGBT people.
2 -
As part of the LGBT this confused me a little. I don't have a problem obviously with LGBT, like cosmetics would be cool but I also like the "make it your own", y'know? You personally get to decide what you see the character as, as they are right now they literally don't have a sexuality. If you want em gay, make em gay, the world is your oyster. If the devs want to actively add LGBT characters that's fine too, I just don't understand why the current ones would need to be changed... I'm fact I'd love to see new LGBT survivors/Killers, I think it'd be rad. I just don't think we should change the originals.
0 -
Some of the current characters are LGBT, that's the point. Only a few are confirmed straight, so the devs want to expand the lore for all of them and reveal their orientations, just like they did for Frank and Julie.
0 -
ohhhh okay. I get it now, I didn't know that before. Thank you for informing me, I didn't notice that stuff before
1 -
Most people who're complaining didn't, which is the problem.
Pro tip: if you see massive outrage about something as innocuous as representation, there's usually a big misunderstanding.
0 -
That's why I posted, I was just confused a bit. I figured there was more but I didn't have the info, sorry if I sounding like a prick. Thank you for enlightening me
1 -
No problem. See you in the Fog (assuming you don't play as a Blendette).
0 -
Lol, see you. I play Bill/David usually so you'll see me around :)
0 -
None of those are wrong assumptions they are different beliefs based on lived experiences evidence and understanding of current knowledge. You are more then welcome to expand
A public statement and a rainbow icon change are infact political. Being apart of any of those groups you mentioned are political and making these discussions on here is in fact political advocate for these groups of ideals.
"I think trapper should have faster movement because he's slow" (not p)
Vs "I think trapper should be trans because... representation" (p)
equity, equality, neutrality are not in fact the same things
Neutrality is what they used to do, witch is to do nothing and let it be ascribed by individuals. "Nothingness"
Equality would be everyone gay or everyone straight "sameness"
Equity would be different groups having advantages over others or differents to create "fairness" when really ascribing these only divides
Im against the tokenism virtue signaling of making past characters lore suddenly need to state there sexualty to be "inclusive"
not everyone likes these things and not everyone wants these things and tbh they really have no place in a video game like this.
Maybe in cyberpunk when romance matters... but not here.
0 -
3 -
You're points are very valid, and this is coming from a gay man. It is a survival game, and I don't think it's necessary to bring sexuality into the game.
1 -
Please don't agree with me if you have that attitude about Pride Month, I don't want people with absolute trash opinions to associate with any of my takes.
5 -
I just want them to let people have their own head canons.
Saying if they are straight, gay, bi, when you had your own head canon.. really is sad ;(
0 -
So basically "I don't want to hear anyone else's opinions that don't agree with mine."
People like you are what preach inclusion, preach diversity, but when someone else doesn't agree with you, you shun them out. It's called Fascism. The "with me or against me," is what Fascism is all about.
Very "inclusive" of you.
1 -
Most companies only care about us when it's June. Its just sad that they don't support us any other time until it's benefitting them.
0 -
RIP Russian players 💀
3 -
I am no one to speak on anothers’ opinions or beliefs, I can only state my own.
IMO, no one really cares about your gender or sexuality, even more so in a video game. You think I’ll just choose NOT to annihilate you because if your orientation?
A survivor is a survivor, a killer is a killer, no gender or sexuality needed or required.
2 -
Lmfao, I'm sorry? Was my response to someone else's bigotry the straw that broke the camels back for you? We shouldn't need to ARGUE the validity of a certain group of people that have been oppressed for centuries due to an unjust system. But sure, call me a fascist because I don't want someone agreeing with my comment because they hold hateful views. Got a genuine chuckle outta your BS, not gonna lie.
4 -
I never directly called you Fascist, your views, your responses, your attitude, your exclusion of everyone but the only people who agree with you is what being a Fascist is about.
You can think what you want, I'm just pointing out the obvious here.
But "with us or against us" attitude, or the "people who agree with me only" personality isn't healthy.
Keep living in your bubble.
2 -
I bet people like you and Joe Schmoe over there are the same people who complain about Black History Month because there isn't a white history month. But, yeah, beat around the bush and imply whatever you want to imply about me, bucko. I'm still adamant about my initial point that if you have absolutely degenerate views that are ripped straight from an era of hate, I don't want you agreeing with me in any capacity because it's 2020 and you honest to god need to put on your big-boy shoes and grow the hell up. I'll keep living in my bubble because it's clear to me you'll keep living in yours as well.
4 -
No need for Russian server if that happens.
0 -
I recall James Rhode taking up the iron man title for a time, which was back when i believe they gave Tony his drinking problem and marvel was going with the idea to make their characters more relatable by giving them flaws and personal issues to deal. Which in that case was building up the characters and expanding on them, not doing what the marvel movies love to do. That and Rhodes was around awhile and personal knew Tony before taking up the iron-man title from what i recall. Yet even while Rhodes was using the title of Iron-man, Tony was still Tony. Which was a nice way of handling a passing down of a title, like batman beyond or my hero academy to name two stories off the title of my head that do a passing the torch story well. Respect the old while also treating a new character like well a new character and having them learn the ropes and tricks of the trade.
Which Riri, yeah the bendis run was questionable, for at times it seem like he didn't know what he wanted to do with Riri. Other writers handle her as a character much better, while using some of the things Bendis brought up in his run for Riri backstory but putting them to far better use than Bendis did.
Which yeah, agreed since normally there is no good reason to change a character's looks or other elements for that matter. For once a character has been release into public for years, well everyone knows what Miles looks like, what Peter looks like. Rapidly changing their iconic looks for no real reason, will just lead to confusion. That and also make people wonder, ok what else did they change about a character? For Hollywood rarely stops at just changing the looks of the characters. For hollywood way of doing it, is normally just to change things to change things. Without asking themselves, is it a good idea to change this thing? That or to bring up the awful berserk 2016 adaption, to show it also happens over seas as well. Just to use one moment from that. Well they skip over a whole story arc that happens in the manga. Which is kind of important, to explain why a group of knights are chasing after Guts and also explains why the fight when the way it did. Like they skip over that whole story arc. The knights just show up out of the blue for no reason. It's missing so much important context, it makes the story look like it sucks, when no the original manga explain this stuff and is a good story. Just that that adaption of it is poor as heck. Sure sometimes you get an adaption that is a poor adaption but a good story. Yet that is not always the case, like with berserk 2016, it's a poor adaption due to not following the original source and leaving out important context needed for the story to make sense.
Which oh yes, the captain marvel movie, agreed that was awful. Yeah the marvel movies do make some questionable choices, to put it nicely.
Which yeah i would say that is fair reasoning. Since well dead by daylight is a video game. A character being gay, straight or whatever. Speaking purely from a game point of view, it will have no effect on the gameplay, making it more a question as to ok why does this matter, in terms of gameplay at least. Killers will still kill, survivors will try to escape. Leaving the only thing that it would be good for, is story telling or rather lore. Which can be handle well or poorly. Which i will bring up two pieces of media, one that handles it poor and one that handles it well.
Cw batwoman, Kate Kane is not very well liked last i took the time to look into that show. Ask a sane person why they dislike her and they would list any of the following. Letting criminals go more than once and not caring until it personal effects her, being so self center, that while people are in danger, she will order her man servant to redesign the whole bat suit, just so everyone knows it her and she will get all the credit for it and not batman. Even when she is in the right, that it not good enough and needs to get pay back at the other person by one upping them. Gets hit by a truck while riding her bike and suffers no damage what so ever. That should of heavily injured her if not killed her. Cheating death/injury in ways that make no sense, which is funny enough, one of the reasons people hate Kirito from sword art online as a character. Kate being stupid or stubborn for no real reason, like she could call up the Flash or super girl to help her but doesn't for reasons. I do mean reasons, for they don't even give you one in the show. Like normally a superhero story will go, oh the other heroes are busy doing x or off world or something. Not here in Cw batwoman, they don't explain jack. Kate steals the credit for someone else's hard work. When she finally has some sort of doubt or struggle, something that finally make you think, oh hey this might be interesting and lead to somewhere. Nope, it's fine. Batman murder someone, so it's ok she murder someone. Which they use as a get out of jail free card, so Kate doesn't have to feel guilty about anything. Which is why you will see many people dislike this character. They come off as selfish, a jerk or down right a villain, when they are meant to be a hero. Only unlike villains in other stories or jerks, you don't get to have that joy of seeing them finally pay the price for all of their misdeeds. Which is why Kate is dislike, she simply has traits that you would find more common in characters like villains that you are meant to hate, that and she doesn't really try to improve herself and anytime it seems like she might have to question herself or might be in danger of harm or suffering, a get out of jail free card happens. Oh yeah and also the bat suit is lacking in consistency in that show, to the point it comes off as legit plot armor made reality. One minute it can protect you from being slammed truck into a wall, can protect you from bullets, being send flying through a wall before falling straight down to the cold hard ground below after falling from a great height, yet will not protect her from a hit to the head, which will knock her out and i believe it was a base ballbat that did it or some other melee weaponry or a bare fist. Like cw batwoman show in general, just has alot of issues.
Now to bring up a manga i read awhile ago, i forget the name of it but it was set in japan during the edo era. You had two samurai that were very close, clearly lovers. One of them dies during a night attack. The one that lives, goes on a quest to avenge his fallen lover. This samurai, you get to live about him as the story goes on. He wanted a simple life, just simply living in a village and was happy for a time, but was dragged away from that. Now one person he care deeply about was taken from him and he has simply seen to much warfare to go back and live a peaceful simple life. He is a blood cover blade, that is full of chipped and broken edges that cannot be repair. The era of the blade, the era of the warrior is coming to an end. Yet before his time in the sun fades away, he will avenge his fellow fallen samurai. That and tries to keep others from joining him on this quest, for he wants them to live and be part of the new era that is coming, one of peace and live a happy healthy long life. This lone samurai also loves to drinks and spending time at certain places of business. While this quest they are going on to avenge their fallen samurai lover, does go against the plans of their master, who is trying to overthrow the shogun. Making them have to suffer the downsides of disobeying others, by being warned and later attacked by other samurai for refusing to obey orders. Which this samurai is bisexual. Yet works out better than Kate from batwoman. Which is due to the writing. For they can suffer negative downsides for their actions and don't have a easy get out of jail free card. They have more likable traits, for they can worry about the well being of others more than Kate ever has. Both of these characters, what makes them good or bad as a character. Is not their sexually but the writing and how the writer [or writers] handle them. The Samurai is better as a character than cw version of Kate, due to simply better writing and treating the samurai as a human being, rather than a god like being that can do no wrong. So well, if they are going to reveal the sexually of a character any way. Hopefully it's a well written story. Since i do believe, if you put forth a good story, the majority of people will be able to get behind it or go yeah this is well written.
1 -
Fascism is a specific political ideology (more like an umbrella of them) that like others determines specific relations between the state, business, citizens, other nations etc etc. It has nothing to do with nothing to do with whether two people online want to associate with each other or not based on different opinions.
5 -
All of this^
And I know what manga you're talking about but, same can't remember the name because I was reading it at the same time as vagabond so I always forget it's name. But like you said this is a video game and I honestly feel like the only real way to add a character's sexuality to the game is by making it a part of their back story.
Disclosure: I am pansexual and while I know I don't have much say in the LGBTQ+ community and I feel like I do have right to speak and give this scenario.
I personally feel and I've toyed around with (and written a few fan fics about it) the idea of a couple being brought to the entities realm because they were in an era where being gay/bi/pan/ace/etc. was frowned upon and they got caught. One of them made a bad choice and basically went ape ######### on their aggressors but it lead to the other being seriously injured. Person who goes ape ######### sees them dying and begs for some force to save them. The entity hears this (much like with Rin/how she saves Maurice) and boom, now you have a non-straight couple that is believable because non-traditional couples being targeted is an unfortunate part of human history. And if you want to throw in some interracial elements to really sell the learning about each others cultures and just trying to live our lives but people won't let us...I mean hey, it works even better because you have the Entity pitting two people who love each other against each other. Then this could lead way to more expansion on what happens when the entity is displeased, it would be a fun archives, and BHVR could make money on seeing couple themed outfits.
And all I'm saying is IF BHVR wants to toy with that idea please contact me first so I can do whatever I need to do legally since I do copyright all of my fan fics after an unfortunate incident with another game company that I won't talk about. But I would be absolutely down to see this implemented in game.
1 -
It's just that. Representation. For those saying "well that shouldn't be in a game" then you need to reevaluate your standpoint. This is never viewed as an issue when straight couples are represented in games or when a character's story is expanded and hints at their sexuality. I didn't see anyone throw a tantrum when David's ex was mentioned in the archives. That was a reason that the DBD team felt the need to voice this, as they have strayed from their original decision to avoid stating or hinting at a character's sexual orientation to allow players to use their own imagination. They're expanding the lore and many relationships have been explored for several characters already whether it's family, friend, colleague, partner, etc. This is to be expected.
Tired of hearing the phrase "forcing their agenda" or "forcing their sexuality down our throats" with a finger pointed to the media or the LGBTQ+ community. No one is forcing you to venture out of your house and hit up the gay clubs. No one is evening asking for you to stand by their side and support them. They want to fit in to society just like anyone else and to be spared from such ignorant remarks that ultimately generate more hate.
That's a good question that we should ask the ones in here opposed to LGBTQ+ representation. Whether a character's sexual orientation comes to light or not, by either gameplay (not in this case but in other games this is relevant) or storytelling, what's the big fuss? A debate never surfaces when it's a straight couple or straight character.
Were you upset when David's ex was mentioned in the archives? She was never mentioned in his original lore. Either way, it's not a matter of rewriting characters. It's a matter of expanding their story and, if by doing so, a past relationship gets mentioned then so be it.
Boomeranging back to the OP:
Now if one's opinion is based on discrimination, then needless to say it's best not to share it. You're right in saying that there is plenty of toxicity on Facebook and Twitter and I can assure you that toxic posts/tweets will nearly always generate toxic replies. And I saw first-hand on Twitter plenty of bigots who were eager to attack BHVR and the LGBTQ+ fanbase soley due to their own biased ignorance. It was disgusting and I sincerely hope that these individuals get the help they need. People too stubborn to fix this mindset will spawn children and raise them with the same prejudical beliefs that their parents forcefed them.
2 -
well a certain reddit most certainly was cookingup these ideas long before BHVR decided to go all in. So if knowing who is sleeping with who is your cup of tea, more power to ya, im just here for the bloodpoints.
0 -
Our existence, that being the mere existence of LGBTQIA human beings, is not an "agenda"
2 -
As if there would be no backlash if it was mentioned before.
they probably got way more feedback regarding that topic now during pride month. And because of that they re-evaluated their previous statement to not include any kind of sexuality and made the decision to include LGBT+ since they already have contradicted themselves before and have mentioned straight relationships. This is by the way no form of pressuring them or threading them to include it, there is no evidence this was the case, just self-reflection and a small little tweet. They didn’t mention it in the anniversary (took place during pride month), they won’t have a section dedicated to it in their upcoming Q&A (also pride month). Not mentioning it at all during this month would have been not very smart from a business point of view, but it sure doesn’t feel like they are making a big deal out of it.
2 -
I'm curious why you'd be against retconning existing characters. That seems a little odd.
Especially as much interesting fanart I've seen regarding Nea and Meg....
1 -
It is not even retconning, no character has been confirmed to be straight or LGBT. We just know of a few straight relationships.
1 -
You are exactly the type of sjw I was talking about. "Agree with what I say or you are a bigot!" Did anyone here say they would stop playing cause a homosexual character is introduced? No, they did not. All they said was that there should be no Nobel prize awarded for doing it. You are looking for bias that isn't there.
And what's your point about corporations. 99% of them don't give 2 craps about the consumer.
In regards to the cosmetics. Japan has a bigger market for games than East Africa so yeah, there will be Japanese cosmetics.
0 -
I agree. Games used to be something used to escape reality, but now times are different. Games/Movies/People/Companies can't just be apolitical anymore, because if you're not with us, then you're against us.
I have nothing against the LGBT community. I'm actually friends with a lot of people in the queer art scene in Seattle. And I think there's potential for gay characters and representation... In the right games, with the right execution. Which I feel isn't something capitalized on a lot. Really, why DBD of all games? I get realistically it's because the devs themselves support LGBT, but does that really make it fitting?
1 -
If movies and tv have it why shouldn't games? What's it really matter if they make a character apart of the LGBTQ+? Seems like a pointless thread to me lol
2 -
Sexual orientation. It's always interesting that people say that but yet society and media shove heterosexuality down our throats. But apparently that's okay, it's just an issue when it's other sexual orientations. You see it in commercials all the time, opposite-sex couples kissing making out hugging in bed, no problem! But a same-sex couple in the same exact commercials? They're shoving it down my throat, it's in your face! With that said I do think it's important to have more representation. And who's to say that the characters are gay or lesbian or bisexual but the information just hasn't been made known yet? It happens in other games and movies and media platforms. Sometimes characters are simply in the closet and they weren't ready to identify themselves. It's not always about trying to retroactively adhere to demands or expectations to change or alter characters. There's also the issue of maybe they were lying or in denial? Even in real life you run into that, there are people who have denied their sexual orientation for decades.
3 -
People are not using the phrase "shove down your throat" properly. Statistically, most people identify as heterosexual so from a marketing and communication standpoint, most ads or media will depict straight relationships. That's not shoving anything downs anyone's throat. When a commercial features a gay couple kissing, that is not shoving anything down people's throat either, unless the whole point of the ad is to show you "look, we have gay people." That is the issue here
2 -
You're right, SDYT means to force or compel you to accept endure or consider something. Your majoritarianism point actually works in reverse, a good society recognizes that need to put the majority population on "alert" about minorities and other classes of persons. This includes basically saying exactly what you stated. It's a broader issue from the "compassionate but disagree" people, they consider everything as SDYT and often want to shield their views behind a desire to keep X out of the discussion. If you're X, stay in the shadows, etc.
1 -
Pandering of any kind annoys me. People's right to be represented doesn't trump my right to not be force feed other's opinions and preferences. People can be what they want and like what they want, they can also dislike what they want and I dislike pandering. I find it to be fake and no different than a lie. A good person does what is right because it is right, not so they can announce it to people for virtue points. But hey that is just my opinion and like ALL other opinions it stinks. :)
1 -
What exactly do you mean? If they revealed X is gay, nothing would change. You make it seem like some Lore would materially change the game. DBD is the perfect game, it features human characters with past lives and stories. Why can't some of them happen to be straight or gay? Not to mention the fact that you claim to have LGBTQ friends, as if that shields your comments from scrutiny or gives you greater credibility or less bias. In fact imo it comes across as highly suspect. It's like the people that engage or make racial statements but declare "I'm not racist, I donate to the NAACP." It's an attempt to insulate their comments or actions so that their declaration means they couldn't possibly be homophobic or racist.
3 -
That's fine but that right doesn't exist. No one here is captive. Instead you would have to decide whether to play or not if you felt a media platform or game or whatever doesn't align with your personal interests.
3 -
Because survivors used to be well written and vague enough to be blank slate. No character to my knowledge is blatantly heterosexual, because there's no point in talking about it in DBD. It's not the game to bring up sexuality and race politics. It just feels shoehorned. Head canon it if you want, but don't make it a point into every players face.
0 -
A good society makes sure the minority has equal rights, it does not mean I need to be "alerted" to anything. Otherwise everything is an alert and the individual is supposed to too toe around everything.
I'm not trying to be ride, but I think you missed my point. My last post was saying Boone cares if you put a gay couple in a commercial. Campbell soup did it a couple years ago and guess what, they still sold soup. They didn't go on Twitter and say " look at our new commercial featuring two dudes kissing, aren't we inclusive."
This dude said it perfectly. Do something because it's right, not because you want attention.
0 -
Tbh idk, I can't think if any have SO's or hints about love life. However I would be ok if an existing or new character had lore that identifies this information, especially to advance their story.
1 -
I agree, its not a bad idea to create characters with these backgrounds.
But it is completely lazy and pandering to retcon a character and wedge in some gay lore because you were too lazy to create a story about a gay character from scratch.... like #########. Like if you wanna go and create a character around these groups don't be lazy.... Make it fresh, treat it with respect.
We have new characters come out of this game every 3 months...... and instead of making a character where its story and theme are full and incorporate its background, lazy pandering companies will just retcon. To either save face, or again...pander.
I like the way Riot Games handled it when they released some of their more "Brown" skinned humanoid characters because they created expansive lore around it so that the world and their existence made sense. Everybody loved it, because Riot didn't just make a black character to be "black" no....they created an entire world, lore, maps, backgrounds, history, protagonist and antagonist in their universe to incorporate their worlds "melenation" and it was brilliant.
When companies do these pandering attempts and wedge in marginalized groups just to save face you should be offended, because its lazy. They didn't actually care, it was just them carving a notch on their totem pole to say "HEY LOOK WE DID IT! WE HAVE A GAY CHARACTER TOO" "LOOK AT US LOOK AT US, GIVE US VIRTUE POINTS!" without them actually putting in the effort to actually create a character, arcs, and lore based around it. Its lazy....and I hate lazy. When Blizzard did it, it was shameful. You shouldn't take hand me downs and scraps as "Representation" its lazy and disrespectful. It'd be like playing dead by daylight and assuming there were no black characters, and instead of creating a black character, they just gave Meg a brown skin....its insulting...
0 -
Sorry for the spelling, I just got off work and my hands are cold
0 -
By "alert" I mean exactly that. I was simplifying the conversation but that refers to the first step in accomplishing getting those equal rights. It's about bringing awareness and being accustomed to differences. People don't win rights overnight. Those media campaigns are important in a societal shift. Not to mention the fact that the alert also refers to the legal process of the courts putting the gov on "alert" about classes of people.
The second part, the reason why they support equality is immaterial if it accomplishes something good. When big corps were in favor of same-sex marriage, did I think it was out of charity or goodness? No, I knew it was because there was change and they didn't want to be left behind on the wrong side of history for the sole purpose of profit and money. Yet does that really matter? So if companies want to be inclusive to earn points or increase sales, makes no difference bc something greater is achieved when more people/corps support a cause.
2 -
I gotta disagree with your second paragraph. You are saying the ends justify the means which is just something I will never believe.
I believe people will be more alert and open to change when it comes naturally. Nobody likes to be told what is supposed to be right or wrong.
1 -
I honestly think keeping a characters sexuality in a game like this completely vague is a good thing tbh. Because it allows you to fit any of the characters into wherever you want them to be. If you think David is gay and, thats why you play him, great.......but as soon as you put a label on those digital pixels...yeah there goes the users ability to inflect or see themselves as any of the characters. If you wanna imagine Meg as a transexual....great..... but again, as soon as they label her a certain way.....welp there goes again any users ability to pick up, play, and relate to any one of the survivors.
Other games get over this obstacle by either leaving all their characters vague pixels where you can imagine whatever the hell you want them to be. OR giving the users a character creation screen where you can again...imagine and make them whatever the hell you want them to be. And by doing it this way, nobody is pushing their "agenda" on anyone because anyone can be whatever the hell they want to be. Labels can be a dangerous and restrictive thing.
1 -
What wrong is being committed exactly? Because that's what "the ends justify the means" is about. A company announcing support for a cause because the world has shifted on a subject? That's the nature of things. Even most religions gain "new insights" on topics or soften a stance in an effort to survive and stay relevant. Look up the Mormon Church and Black people in the 80s, lost of good reading there. Publicly it was a shift to be inclusive and loving for all God's children but internal a desire to survive as exclusion was no longer palatable. I can't think of any company that truly does anything out of charity, even charity efforts are solely to achieve favorable perception or brand awareness. I just don't see this changing and why now? It's what happened for racism, women's rights, etc but suddenly there is a problem when companies do support LGBTQ.
EDIT: I just gave it more thought and there were some companies that did support equality when it wasn't that popular. The Walt Disney Company is one such that has been offering equal benefits since the 90s? Most didn't have a stance but then later emerged as supporters, mainly when the climate was right to avoid hurting business.
1 -
As an indigenous person I would appreciate it if you didn't exclude me from a video game because of some pre-conceived notion and generalization about where we should be in a story. Everyone else gets to be characters....but we can't because of some imposed virtuous reasoning? Thats not fair, and by all accounts as racist as telling a black person that they cannot be in a film as a serial killer because of some generalization about their people.
Everyone else is getting killed and having a great time being represented in this game but I can't because I'm indigenous?
0
