DAVID KING IS OFFICIALLY GAY
Comments
-
Its not necessary to mention they are straight either. My stance is leave it up to the consumer to decide what they want each character to be. If someone wants to believe the entire roster is gay, so what? Let them. Also when I said I will assume the rest are straight that was me wondering why they haven't come out and said it yet especially for the older characters. Why wait? Why not come out and tell us what the sexuality of a few other survivors are now? Or are we supposed to be left in the dark about characters we know and love for a long time now? Why does this have to be about representation instead of just telling a story about a fictional character?
1 -
If I had to take a wild guess or give my opinion on David King I would say I highly doubt "possibly gay" or "gay" was one of the things written on the concept art paper when he was being designed. You know no one would be complaining about this or criticizing it had they made him gay from the start or even early on in DBD. A lot of people see this as pandering or tokenism.
0 -
No I just don't want video games to turn into representation simulators. Besides, it doesn't matter what I personally want. You on the other hand seem to have a problem with dissenting opinions about a fictional video game character and you're telling me to grow up. 🤣
0 -
They probably didn’t write ‚straight‘ either, so that argument doesn’t help in any way. A lot of people would see a new character being gay as pandering and tokenism and there would be more basis for that argumentation than it is for David.
They have revealed it WITH the release of the tome where it is an integral part of the story, you realize this, yeah? They didn’t just go ‚oh by the way David is gay lol‘ like Rowling did with Dumbledore. They have written and revealed the story - and this is their actual normal kind of story telling! There have been 10 tomes already and I’m each of them at least for 2 existing characters they have revealed story’s which added and expanded upon the backstory.
asking to reveal any characters sexuality would feel forced and doesn’t have any relevance to their normal take on story telling. For some characters it may be revealed later on, for some it will only be indirect through mentioned relationships and for some sexuality may never be written about at all. That has been the approach kn DbD since the beginning.
and just to be clear: stating you would want everyone left open and therefore you didn’t like David’s reveal is completely understandable and valid criticism (though with multiple heterosexual relationships there could have still be a homosexual relationship mentioned without outright saying he is gay - would you have had a problem with that for David?)
also something worth noting: have you ever heard of someone that is heterosexual that they officially revealed it about themselves? Be it for family, friends, at work, in public? It’s something that straight people usually don’t do so it would feel very forced if suddenly someone came out as straight. While for gay people (or LGBTQ+ people) it’s sadly quite the norm that it is almost expected for them to come out. Otherwise people will just assume they are straight..
1 -
I don't think they should reveal their sexuality at all. And you're right! They probably didn't right straight either on his concept art and you know what? That is perfect! It should've stayed that way.
0 -
So it would have been okay to tell a story about David starting to date men after he only dated women to please his parents? Though they never use the word gay.
because.. that’s in line with how heterosexual relationships were part of the lore since Nurse was added and pretty much no one complained.
1 -
Take out the whole representation narrative and they can make the entire roster gay for all I care.
0 -
But you already explicitly stated that you think David shouldn’t have been ‚randomly chosen‘ to be gay. You are starting to contradict yourself.
so it’s literally only the twitter announcement and website blog which you have a problem with? Because if so… then maybe state so from the beginning. That’s completely understandable and is also only been done because of previous official statements by the devs
1 -
No you're wanting me to contradict myself because you think it'll prove some kinda point. I've already stated how I feel about this and I'm pretty much done with it now unless you keep replying to me about it. Yes I do think it was weird he was randomly chosen to be gay. I also think they should leave it up to the players to decide what they want each character to be. It is their characters though so they can do what they want with them. I just think it would be a lot less controversial if they just did it without making such a big deal about it. But overall my stance is why bother doing it to begin with? Let everyone be happy with their imaginations of fictional characters they love.
0 -
I mean, you are also always replying to me and you can just stop with that as well.
As to imaginations: as I said that’s not really completely open since Nurse. And you can still imagine anything you want even if it is not in line with the canon lore. No one is limiting you. In the end, even fictional characters can have established determined traits, features etc. that’s what makes them characters instead of avatars.
1 -
Characters are players' Avatars within the digital environment.
1 -
They still have definitive traits especially in DbDs case and that since the very beginning. No one cared that Claudette was a botanist, Jake was Korean, Nurse had a husband she dearly loved, Frank and Julie were a sexually actively couple (which was only added in their tome story and not part of the initial lore) etc. It’s only when it’s LGBTQ+ related that some people suddenly have a problem with it. But they also can never really state what the actual problem is.
2 -
I'm glad they did it this way make it more real because some people don't know they gay till late in life sometime.
also I wouldn't want a new character which they only backstory is they gay.
most survivors and killers who don't have a tome we don't know they sexuality till they get a tome that how it should be.
3 -
wait, have I responded to this yet? Anyways..
You don’t need a hint, you haven’t asked for hints for any other tome story which also were released way after the release of the character. This is part of DbDs story telling. If you have a problem with that then you can of course express your criticism, but it’s very suspicious that so many people only ever have a problem with it when it’s LGBTQ+ related, don’t you think?
and again: how is 2 years (=24 months) compared to 9-12 months rushed?
as to emotional attachment: if you are so shallow to be influenced by the characters sexuality being revealed when there hasn’t been a hint towards it in any way that’s completely on you and not BHVRs problem or mistake. Nothing changed about David King. He is still the very same character he used to be.
there won’t ever be a character who a player can completely identify with. If you can identify with a muscular ex-rugby player who was abandoned by his rich family and now punches people for a living you can also identify with a gay muscular ex-rugby player who was abandoned by his rich family and now punches people for a living and if you are incapable of that then there is something wrong with your attitude.
and as to Peanits comment: they were limiting themselves for their first LGBTQ+ representation. Now they are done with that milestone they have stated there can (and will) be more coming.
3 -
🗿 And you should educate yourself on what I've actually been messaging.
0 -
Not going to fall for that. Read below.
As you seem to be quoting me with allusions towards things i never said or share and also adding negative connotations in your responses, i think it is time to wrap things up.
- Hinting not being a neccessity for me is a fantastic statement, thank you for telling me what i need. I guess the same that David being the choice was also not needed by anyone?
- A player might not have asked for hints about other characters due to not having the same or even no emotional attachment towards them.
- Emotional attachment is not only applicable to a single sexuality...
- If David sexuality was revealed two years ago, which i don't know, it would still have been years since their initial lore... years without revealing a game character sexuality or hinting it and out of a sudden doing it does indeed feel rushed and unnecessary knowing another character had to eventually come. Want to ask this one again?
- About being shallow, incapable of, having a problem with my attitude... you nailed it there, please explain how someone should be cappable of changing how something feels for them? And in favor of what exactly, your perception of which feelings are shallow or not?
Depending on the nature of your response i might just leave it here.
0 -
Can you just reveal every survivor's sexuality now and save everyone the trouble
I don't feel like getting surprised again a year later
1 -
Well if a character being gay bothers you so much, you very much deserve learning your mains are gay until you either learn to accept gay is fine or you leave.
2 -
Good business model
0 -
don't know why people care who gay or not I mean when the tome talks about straight relationship no one care but LGBT wanted representation now we do everyone cares.
most likely the straight people who get characters in movies video games and tv shows all the time with no problem but they someone gay oh no.
2 -
Of course David being the choice wasn’t needed. But it was a great choice as it fits very well with the lore we already have.
you are still focusing only on sexuality. If emotional attachment is applicable to other things then why is no one ever using this argument when it’s not about LGBTQ+? Because even for the tomes that actually retconned initial lore there wasn’t as much criticism or complaints.
You are trying to set limitations on the story telling of the devs by stating they can’t reveal the sexuality of their characters after some time of their initial release, but the way tomes work that’s just not possible. Also it wasn’t out of a sudden, they have talked about their collaboration with GaymerX often times and never have they explicitly stated the representation will be done with a new character.
i used the word shallow because you are focusing only on the sexuality of the character while completely leaving out anything that actually defines the character. Thinking the character itself somehow changed because their sexuality was revealed (and not changed) is shallow.
1 -
Can you not try to force them to do something that’s not in line with their approach of story telling?
you can assume that every character other than David can have any sexuality - just like you would with people in real life. You shouldn’t get surprised by the reveal when nothing was ever confirmed before anyways.
2 -
Making a new character LGBT+ would be taking the easy way out because then that person could just be brushed off as the token gay. The harder route is having a pre existing character come out in expanded backstory because then you have to live with everyone who had preconceptions about the character confront the reality that they are gay.
This is a thing that happens in life. People come out, and those that knew them before have to recognize that. A lot of gay men grow up having girlfriends before they figure their selves out or are maybe in denial. People are multifaceted, emotions are complex.
A new character would have just been seen as being made solely to be "the gay one" and it would have been reductive. I think this is the much better choice for the moment of being DBD's first.
1 -
what is so lazy and half-arsed I wouldn't want a new character who character traits is they gay.
none of the survivors or killers who don't have tomes don't have a sexuality yet we only know a few mostly straight now there someone gay and it big deal and it not.
people need to get over this not care like some say they don't but they really do and not for any good reasons.
Post edited by Rizzo on0 -
Corporate pandering for:
A free character
A free tome
A battlepass with purely optional cosmetics that aren’t even all that interesting, imo. Not to mention that if you complete it, you get your currency back. I have done so for all but one tome, meaning I had only had to pay up twice.
Stretching a teensy bit, eh?
1 -
No one believes the entity cares? Everybody knows the entity is not real…
it’s not lazy nor is it half-assed either. That’s just a lazy and half-assed argument against representation.
the employees of this company, those that are creating the characters and story’s, DO care. That’s what matters here. And the company is not preventing representation or support of the LGBTQ+ community. You really have no basis for anything you are blubbering there.
1 -
Cope.
1 -
Cope.
1 -
and ur mad
0 -
I need to cope when you are the one being mad?
i got LGBTQ+ rep in DbD. I am fairly happy with the current situation :)
1 -
I give up on these people who don't care but really do care to much.
1 -
Bit more harsh than I'd put it, but someone has to say it eventually
0 -
Not really corporate pandering considering it's free content, the game had a LGBT following (and more importantly request for representation) years before this happened
Also have you read the lore? I don't see what's so lazy/half-arsed about it, they clearly put way more effort into it than they did previous tomes considering it's length
1 -
I thought we played video games for fun. ohh yeah its 2022 my bad.......
1 -
Wait… how is the game not fun anymore due to this?
1 -
Nice to know you're happy about your representation in DBD while the rest of us have to sit and wait wondering if the survivors we play are going to suddenly be trans.
2 -
This is my concern with gaming these days but it seems to be a brushed off opinion. Video games are slowly transitioning into representation simulators and mediums of social statements. Remember when the BLM stuff was going on. I couldn't log onto anything without getting that crap shoved in my face.
2 -
//
4 -
And where would be a problem with that? You are also waiting and wondering if your survivors play a specific instrument or not, engaged in some specific sports, had specific jobs (in some cases we don’t know, in some we do).
that was always part of DbDs story telling.
Nothing about the gameplay changed. Heterosexual relationships and straight characters were shoved in everyones faces in videogames since the early days of their existence. And you did say nothing about that.
1 -
What's the problem with someone being trans lmao?
0 -
Nothing was ever shoved in your face. There was nothing to be said. Markets always gravitate towards the majority. If the LGBT community was a majority in those times you would've seen a lot more of it in video games.
0 -
Peach kissing Mario who then turns red wasn’t shoved into my face and there is no way of completing the game without seeing it? But a twitter post is shoving something in your face while you don’t even need to be on twitter to play the game?
can you elaborate on this please?
1 -
The point was the customers and fans of these characters deserve to know before spending more money on them.
1 -
You're the first person I've ever seen complain about that. Grats? Again, markets and majority.
0 -
Oh wow. So you're kind of a piece of #########, huh?
5 -
Yeah and the current market is asking for LGBTQ+ representation.
also that wasn’t a complain. Just a fact. Super Mario World is still one of my favourite games ever and I don’t let the sexuality of a character determine how much I like a game.
so grats to you on your problems with DbDs representation.
1 -
Is it? What market are you looking at? I see a lot of people doing it for virtue signal points but I don't think its the majority norm in the world yet. Also I don't think when Peach kissed Mario they had him do it for representation.
0 -
Sure why not I guess? I mean I think I'm pretty much considered a homophobe by a few people here by now so you can go ahead and throw another label on me. Its fine. You won't see me doing that to you or anyone else here though. Hatred isn't my thing.
0 -
Eh. We already know that the devs of DbD are not only doing it for representation either. They have stated they see themselves as an inclusive company/team and they are standing behind it.
and virtue signaling -even though that argument is just a buzz word and doesn’t stand for anything- still requires a market that is for this.
It seems more like you want people to call you a homophobe at this point to prove some point. All while you are labeling the devs/creators of DbDs characters which is totally fine.
1 -
Is it just me or are the ones who are the most accepting of David's coming out the ones who have insulted more people?
3
