DAVID KING IS OFFICIALLY GAY
Comments
-
I know exactly what he means.
0 -
I don't think you do...
0 -
I in fact do. The fact that men have had gf's have been said multiple times, but that doesn't change the fact before they made him gay, it was just his ex. Not him being gay and his ex...just his ex.
0 -
this shouldn't encourage hate on twitch, the same way that Claudette Morel doesn't encourage racism. Also if people harass David for that reason (Which believe me I already experienced it) It's not the fault of the character but the fault of The player doing the actions
Also for the bubba masks, they are a different case of Certain players Using something that made Poc uncomfy and harassing/Targeting them with it to cause a reaction
1 -
Do you people ever think about anything but yourselves?
2 -
You have no evidence that the writers didn’t already knew at that point that David was gay. It just wasn’t relevant in that story to mention. They certainly didn’t mention that David was in love with that ex girlfriend or that he was happily straight.
1 -
Peanits comment about David being gay says they looked at the characters and said "we decided David would the best choice". It could've been anyone. Intended to be gay or not.
They chose a character and wrote lore to make them gay. There isn't any "the devs already knew David would be gay before they even decided to make a LGBT character".
0 -
You said yourself the comment sounded like an excuse to you. But now the comment is good enough to use as an argument for you? Is that comment and it’s contents now valid or not?
and keep in mind, it’s just a brief comment. They have announced to include LGBTQ+ representation almost 2 years ago (June 2020), they have since given updates that they are working with GaymerX to avoid rushing it or creating bad stereotyped or bad representation/writing. Do you actually think they needed two years to just randomly choose? Isn’t it more logical to assume they discussed various possibilities and decided that David was fitting because of various reasons (including existing lore and initial creation of the character)?
2 -
They could've chose anyone and made lore. There is nothing else to say about that.
The response was company talk. I believe some devs and team members have good intentions, but it was company talk nonetheless. They cannot come out and say exactly what happened with this. It gave a bad impression.
But knowing that is some of the only information we know, it still says the picked and choosed.
0 -
You know? They could have chosen anyone. That’s how writing lore for your own characters work. At least in this case they chose someone where it doesn’t contradict anything in the existing lore and actually ties in loose ends and make it natural that way. It was definitely not as random as you want to make it out to be. It was a decision they very likely have discussed.
the only problem here is you have your head canon that David should be straight for whatever reason and now you and criticizing them for not having respected your head canon. At least you have given literal zero other argument why David shouldn’t have been ‚chosen‘.
3 -
I don't care they that there's a gay character.
I've said they shouldnt have made an existing character gay. Thats my opinion.
1 -
Why not though? As long as the character was never stated to be straight, where is the problem?
Do you also think it was wrong to reveal Frank and Julie being a couple in their tome lore when it wasn’t mentioned in their backstory?
2 -
Yep. I agree. The way this was done just felt so... wrong. To me it was like picking a random number out of a hat and trying to make a big deal about it when the number was something everyone is already familiar with. What would've been so hard about making a new original character for whatever you wanted to use to represent something? And by the way, we get it. You guys support lgbt. Good... great... how many more charms are you going to release with a rainbow on it before you realize that we do in fact get it? Which survivor are you going to pick next to be something entirely out of left field? This whole thing just feels so cringe.
1 -
Why the hell does DBD need to have a "big push for representation"? Why do you care about them doing this?
2 -
Why do you care so much that they're implementing representation?
1 -
Because its not necessary and I don't want video games that exist in a fantasy world to turn into social statements concerning reality?
1 -
This is that article of your friend, right? I’m just gonna edit this into the OP, because this is the umpteenth time this has come up and I doubt it’ll be the last time.
3 -
Why is this only relevant with LGBTQ+ representation though?
literally everything else in the lore such as heterosexual relationships are equally as unnecessary. But still, people only have a problem with this when it’s about LGBTQ+… makes you wonder why
3 -
Excuse me? You people? What the hell is that supposed to mean?
1 -
Its not. I don't play video games to see how well something from real life is represented in it. This doesn't feel organic. This doesn't feel natural. This was a very random thing to do to a character that has been around for years. Why not just make a new character if they wanted to do this? I can promise you I won't be jumping for joy and scream yay representation if they announce any particular character as being straight. It is not relevant or necessary in a freaking video game.
2 -
Paywall + risk of being accused of tokenism.
2 -
I feel like people are going to see this as tokenism too. If they had just released a new character like this I don't think anyone would honestly care. This however just feels lazy.
1 -
and why should the devs care about what you personally play video games for?
there are plenty of other players and it’s their medium.
it doesn’t feel natural to be against representation this much when it literally doesn’t change anything at all about the game but some flavor text about a fictional character. And it’s not very random? It’s the 11th rift, every rift came with new stories for at least 2 characters, adding to their backstories and fleshing them out as defined characters. Why should they limit themselves to not reveal an existing character as LGBTQ+ but only new ones? Especially when heterosexual relationships were added the same way and no one complained about it.
3 -
Why should they care about what I personally play video games for? Did you really just ask that? What the hell do you think surveys are for? Businesses have entire departments around this very subject to better their product. I highly doubt making David King gay was a conclusion based on customer feedback about this character.
And by the way, its how its done that matters.
Post edited by KateMain86 on0 -
uhm… have you seen fan art of David King before?
People against David King being gay are probably in the minority, most people actually don’t care or are in favour of it. So you pretty much answered yourself why it’s okay that he was revealed to be gay
2 -
Nope. Never have seen fanart of him like that. And no you don't speak for "most people." You speak for yourself. And if you want to use fanart as evidence of customer feedback for demand of making him gay then by that logic countless other fictional characters may as well be too. The idea of David King being gay has never once crossed my mind in the 2000+ hours I've put in this game. In fact I've always seen him as the exact opposite. Does my feedback about him matter?
2 -
I actually didn’t speak for myself. I don’t care about David King being gay. I just care about equal treatment. For all i care about David can be revealed to have been confused but turned out straight later as long as LGBTQ+ content isn’t explicitly excluded from the game anymore.
your feedback matters, sure. But it’s not the one truth the devs have to deliver to as it’s just your head canon.
David Kings sexuality was never stated before in any way. You can’t conclude his sexuality from any other traits or characteristics.
the creators of David King have decided he is gay. Doesn’t matter if the majority wanted him to be gay or wanted him to be straight or left ambiguous. It’s their character and in the end their decision, no matter what fans say. You can of course voice your opinion that you don’t like it and would rather see him be straight. That’s after all just an opinion. But if you are trying to force them to only make new characters LGBTQ+ and not existing ones while you are okay with existing ones being revealed as straight then there we have not an opinion but something else.
3 -
David King has cosmetics that can be purchased with auric cells which cost real money. I think it does matter what the majority of his fans wanted him to be. I personally think its better to leave it to the fans/customers as to what they want them to be and have no official canon stance on anything. Why? Because it removes the risk of pushing people away from something they had valued for a long time. The smallest things or changes can influence whether or not a customer will spend money on something. If I don't ever play David King again, why would I spend money on him? I've spent a lot of money on this game. I've also changed my mind about spending a lot of money on it based on many different things. Everything matters and in the world of making profit the whole "less is more" thing is actually a pretty good idea when it comes to things like this.
2 -
Have you ever voiced this opinion over any other lore addition in one of the other 10 rifts with all the tome stories? there is always something revealed about characters that wasn’t known before.
3 -
I already told you: less is more.
0 -
So just out of curiosity, is it safe to assume the rest of the survivors on the roster are straight since David King is the first and only one to be confirmed as gay? Why not tell us the sexuality of all the survivors in a similar post to the one they made about David King? Because you know, for years it was safe to assume anything about David King without any official confirmation. The same can be said about the rest of the roster. But if David King is going to be confirmed as gay then I must assume the others aren't if they aren't willing to come out now and give an official statement about the rest of them.
2 -
No, not safe to assume. Only David’s sexuality is directly revealed, while we do have multiple heterosexual relationships mentioned for other characters, those are not confirmation that they are straight.
they don’t have to tell us the sexuality of every character? That would feel actually forced. If it’s part of the story they want to tell (as it is in David’s case), that’s fine. Otherwise it’s not necessary. Also it was never completely safe to assume anything about David. He did have a girlfriend at some point in his life and this was part of the character and his struggles with his sexuality and accepting who he is.
you know.. you are really making it hard for others to assume this is not about homophobia if you make statements like these…
3 -
I think you want to assume that about me for having a dissenting opinion about this, but of course that is just my opinion. Don't forget, less is more. ;)
Until I get an official confirmation about the rest of the roster then I am going to assume they are straight. And again, that is just how I feel about it. Hope you don't have a problem with that especially over fictional characters. :)
0 -
No, I have repeatedly asked you if you feel the same about other lore additions other than sexuality or even heterosexuality, but you are avoiding to answer my questions. As far as I see, your only problem with lore additions is David king being revealed as gay. And that’s probably the only one you are actually voicing your opinion of - without any arguments.
and of course you can assume they are straight. You can also still assume David is straight. No one is trying to limit your head canon.
3 -
Yeah that's Cam's Uni thesis
0 -
Video games are an art form, and art is always representative of the creator's societal views regardless on if you want to see it or not. You can always ignore the lore, if it's so irrelevant to you, instead of being pressed that gay people dare to exist.
5 -
Umm... yes. If I were to find out anything I don't like about a character I like I will voice my opinion about it. I found out about David King on twitter. I don't read the tomes or the lore stuff in DBD. Thats why I keep saying less is more. The less I know about these characters the better.
1 -
If you don't care about the lore then please stop discussing the lore because with every word you utter about the lore it makes it seem like you do, in fact, care an awful lot about the lore.
4 -
They made plenty of lore Tweets all the time though.
so you are telling me after all this time and all these stories the only thing you have a problem with is David revealed as being gay? And that has totally nothing to do with you being against LGBTQ+ representation in videogames?
4 -
Out of curiosity, who thinks that was necessary or better to reveal David sexuality over creating a new character?
1 -
Yep. For reasons already stated. I don't owe you anything more than that so you can keep posting with your assuming tone all you want. Doesn't bother me none.
2 -
Rude people who get a kick out of antagonising others
0 -
Yeah I think it was better this way. It'd either be tokenism if they made a new one or "changing" if they revealed an old one so they couldn't win, and I'm more than happy with this. His story ties up loose ends from his first tome and helps provide representation, as well as just being one of the best written tome stories there are (shockingly, Twins' story is also pretty class). Moreover, revealing a character people are attached to is better than making a new one because of the paywall issue and also that people are already attached to them, rather than making someone whose lore could be as disastrous as Jonah but also be gay causing a bit of a conflict there.
No, this was definitely the better way to do it. I wish they'd saved the Twitter announcement for when his Tome level opened up and the story was available, but outside of that I'm more than happy.
(And for context, I am a gay dude).
3 -
Well I guess I can clarify that a little more. I care about the characters I care about. Kate, Meg, Yui, Feng, Jill, Leon to name a few. I read some stuff about them in game out of curiosity but thats about it. I don't actively scroll down the DBD twitter looking for lore updates. I just so happen to see this mentioned in the twitter feed they have here on the forums and then saw this thread about it. I think I can give my opinion about things if I want to. If that bothers you so much, even if you feel I have no place to give my opinion about this, then you are by no means obligated to read anything I say.
Honestly, I care more about putting on a smoking hot outfit on Kate and giving killers a hard time than I do about the deep lore of the game. I've never seen this game as one for much lore. Maybe if it had more content related to lore that was playable in game but the game is about repairing 5 generators and opening a door for survivors. I don't need lore to do that. I do like looking good while doing it though.
0 -
At least I am not bothered by some optional background lore about a fictional character 🤷♂️
and again, I questioned you to find out if the assumptions holds true or not. I gave you many chances to explain your reasoning but it all boils down to you having something against LGBTQ+ representation in videogames. And that you explicitly stated and is all I am assuming.
3 -
so having another opinion than yours is rude and can’t have another reason than antagonizing others?
2 -
Assuming tone is assuming against dissenting opinion.
To be fair, I don't think there should be any kind of representation in video games. But if you're going to do one thing, may as well do it for everyone right? I have a loooooooooong list of things I'd love to see represented in DBD. Would you like to see it? :)
0 -
I think this way it was better.
a new character would just be criticized as only being created as a token rep. And regardless of how their backstory would have been written people would say the character is one dimensional and their only personality would be their sexual orientation/identity. It would be either paid (only doing it for the money) or free (pandering). Perks would be criticized to be overpowered because of pandering/underpowered because they don’t actually care about representation.
there is actually way more things people would complain about with a new character. With an old one the argument of retconning is used but it doesn’t have any basis and other than that it’s just the head canon of some being confirmed/deconfirmed which … well. It’s just headcanon.
2 -
Sure I would!
and they are not done, actually DbD has shown they are open to more representation over time with very diverse nationalities/ethnicities being added etc.
2 -
Yes, changing an established character that's been around for years then telling people to shut up an take it, is incredibly thoughtless and rude.
1
