Soooo We're Finally Not Going To Dance Around Character Orentation
Comments
-
Oh really? I was certain they were going to say he was gay. Just shows how little I read the lore lol the only relationship I knew about was Wraith and Nurse.
We'll see what happens either way.
0 -
I agree, keep ######### politics out of a video game about killing and torturing survivors for the amusement of a lovecraftian god monster. People it's called escapism for a reason.
2 -
Unfortunately it looks so. As long as we can get at least one character I'd be appeased.
I don't expect any company to actually follow through or even care about such issue, but even less so during Pride month.
0 -
This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You know perfectly well that this is a bad faith whataboutism argument that you are making.
2 -
If it'd been done during any other month, the usual people would still be claiming "it's a political statement", like they do every time a non-heterosexual is included in any media format. It's almost like they just don't want non-heterosexuals.
2 -
I understand what you mean but my point is the devs originally wanted to avoid this but decided to open the box so why not go all the way? Any reason they shouldn't?
0 -
Because sexual orientation isn't the same as political affiliation.
3 -
This topic is a bit of a hand grenade, and this forum about a video game where a woman with stomach flu hits ice cream vendors and military veterans with her lamp is definitely not the best place for a nuanced discussion about social responsibility and inclusiveness.
1 -
But your talking to me not "the usual people" so I would appreciate if you talked to me. But now that the strawmen comparisons are coming out I can see where we are headed.
I'm going to stop now, I said my part, and I have no interest in where this is going.
0 -
Since when is being gay a political thing? I don't think a young child suddenly decided they were X party affiliated when they found out their sexuality.
3 -
Same do I think but I mean I wont stop playing a char cuz he likes gay or its trans or whatever 🤷🏻♂️
0 -
Thing with those examples are, they're not used to say "HEY. THIS PERSON'S STRAIGHT." More the action being the thing to take away from it, Dwight has a crush on someone. David's ex doesn't want him or whatever it was. Whether they're straight, gay, bi, or an attack helicopter. It doesn't change anything about them or their personality, not really. So, I don't see why it matters what they are, or why their preference should be focused on and I really don't think it should be a part of anything, even though it already is in those cases.
Yui is the biker, not the lesbian, or the Bisexual, or that straight girl, or even the Bike.
1 -
tbh it's only political because some people still live in the Jim Crow era. If it was just accepted and we could all move on and not make a big deal about it when gay characters are introduced we'd all be much better off.
3 -
In all honesty, whilst the lore for Dwight with Rose recognises a heterosexual individual, it could also be said that it never mentioned he liked men too. Maybe he was uncertain, sought Rose, but at another point in his life (before or after - I haven't finished his lore) he realises he is bi or gay. Heck, he may end up realising he had no sexual desire at all!
I like the idea of making a character fit whatever the player wants! I'm straight, and perhaps I identify with Dwight more because of his appearance and character I imagine him with one of the girls, but equally I don't want to be told that's canon. He should be whatever anyone wants him to be, and if people prefer to see him gay or anything else, they should have the ability to do so, rather than being dictated this individual is something else.
Way better to allow your imagination to create how you wish the game to be, than be told there's no room for wriggle.
1 -
Anyway as its a multiuniverse orientation wont matter. Maybe on one universe David is gay and on other is asexual or whatever you want 🤷🏻♂️
2 -
That doesn't stop @ABannedCat, so why are you letting it stop you?
1 -
And I agree, completely. The way I see it, this goes both ways: if David’s ex story had said that HE didn’t want to see him again, it should be no more earth-shattering than how it reads. That’s all I think BHVR are trying to get at with their tweet. Some lore snippets will have that kind of thing in them going forward, and that’s not a bad thing at all.
1 -
I understand your point, and for the most part it's not a bad one. It would be nice if we could keep everyone ambiguous, but think about it from the flip side. Most media is over-saturated with straight characters, you don't have to look far at all to have some character to feel similar to.
I'd like to have that opportunity but sadly it's rare for me to have characters like that to identify with and I don't have to make that part of their lore up. That's the bad part about keeping it ambiguous; you silently assume everyone to be whatever is the "default" and that is still currently seen as straight by a lot of people.
1 -
Then what's wrong with mentioning the gay David when it's story related or straight David when he's story related?
1 -
I don't follow. Nothing is stopping me deciding anything, so not sure what you're getting at. Could you elaborate please?
0 -
I didnt get what you mean As I just said the game is multiuniverse and it could have an *insert orientation* character thats it. 🤷🏻♂️
0 -
Yeah, and what you say does make a lot of sense. There is undoubtably a lot of saturation of straight characters and individuals, and your idea of having characters to identify as is important as it would be for everyone.
You've given me some food for thought though. I'm interested to know how you would deal with the lore and what you would like to see. :)
1 -
That’s exactly what I hope for!
dont bring a new tag in the survivor overview that shows their orientation, just being here and there a snippet in the lore just like they do now with straight relations. And don’t make it a must-have for every character either. Just where it fits and it doesn’t restrict the writers, because it was some kind of restriction until now.
3 -
Do not misrepresent what I was replying to. Someone said for survivors to also include there political views and the person i was agreeing with said something along the lines of lets not bring politics into it. It had nothing to do with being gay.
0 -
I just personally...dont like inclusiveness if its just a gimmick. It feels so cheap to me. And can even feel falsely inclusive. Like they REALLY dont care as a creator.
Dev rolls 20 sided die
D8
*checks list*
"Kate's Queer" well..on to other things ...
Maybe its just my way of seeing things...maybe im not even explaining very well....
2 -
I'm glad! I'd probably just stitch it into their background tbh. Not a throw away insert but a reasonable little tid bit. Maybe their partner was the reason they embarked to somewhere and subsequently were taken by the Entity. Stuff like that.
0 -
I think is the first time I see forum not discussing about buffing nerfing things and complaints about SWF or *insert killer name* is OP😂
In my humble opinion devs should just avoid the communication and added a non hetero character long ago 🤷🏻♂️
1 -
I meant @ABannedCat makes up their own stories regardless and doesn't feel constrained by lore, so why can't you do the same?
0 -
Yeah that is the biggest downside to getting representation is you get the shoddy, done only for browny points kind that means nothing and is forgotten the second June is over or it stops making money.
That would be a more sincere and impactful way that's for sure. Just release the character and have it in the lore and not even mention it until players start talking about it. But oh well, companies gotta company I gue$$.
2 -
You're right, everyone should be transparent, neuter, and shapeless blobs. No inclusiveness for anyone. Also no cultural themes, so the maps will be empty voids.
2 -
I need some popcorn
0 -
I don't understand your response...?
0 -
You said you didn't want inclusiveness, so let's get rid of it. All of it.
3 -
So make it a part of the overall, as opposed to having it as the key identifier? That would work. That's how a lot of straight characters are portrayed, and it would make sense to have other orientations portrayed in the same way to promote as true an equality, in so that people are defined by so much more than sexuality.
Maybe you twisted my arm just a bit in the other direction, although just to be clear I still like the idea of being able to freely identify with whichever character I like, but from what you say it's about how it is written in which makes it.
So yes, I wouldn't be upset if it was as you say. Actually, I wouldn't be upset at all regardless honestly! :)
1 -
your second point is exactly how i feel every time a company makes some sort of inclusion announcement. if you announce it, it feels like they're just going "hey, we're doing the thing! like us!". but if you just do it and dont make a deal about it, then it feels more sincere. like if one of the archive stories just had something like, "as Jake woke up in this new strange place, he thought of his boyfriend". just seems more natural and part of the lore if its just there. now people are going to look at every archive story and be like "is this the story where someone comes out as gay?"
2 -
These are characters in a fictional world. Everything about them is made up. Every gay fictional character in existence was made by someone who said "Hey, I think maybe this character should be gay" at some point, and then made them gay. This is how fiction works -- it is created by someone, and characters have attributes and personalities that the creator applies to them.
2 -
I never said that.. I said I dont like it when creators dont mean it. It's using people in a way...
Why not include. Just to include. Cause its the world we live in. Why does things have to be political. Care about people.. dont use people.
2 -
You know what I like in my entertainment that I use to escape real world politics and drama? Real world politics and drama...
0 -
Which is also why giving them a sexuality doesn't really matter imo. By leaving it out, players can choose the sexuality of their character on their own.
But as a person with a strong sense of self, I don't need representation in a video game although I know how nice it would feel to have a Mexican Killer in the game.
4 -
So this will be my final post for this thread because to be honest this turned into something that makes me genuinely uncomfortable. I didn't realize me expressing happiness for a decision and talking about how I'm happy that a company will include representation when for a majority my life media has been used to treat LGBTQ+ people as villains or mentally ill people along side the world doing the same in both nonviolent and violent ways would anger so many people. My bad, in the future I'll choose to not talk. Didn't mean to make anyone uncomfortable.
2 -
What a stupid thing to say, you know darn well when these companies do this inclusiveness thing most of the time they don't really commit to it, it's just a flavor of the month for sales and being a "supporter".
0 -
The issue is it's done wrong a lot of the time and they literally base a character around that one trait..its boring and is blatantly pointed in peoples faces...but the issue here is its literally going to just going to be a ton of needless shoe horning adding Frankenstein level random traits that clearly are additives not originally intended..itll be a blemish because they will highlight it rather than smoothly transition it into characters lives..its happened before and the game will lose over it...because they chose to do it this way
0 -
That is what they're doing, including just to include, but you're the one saying it's political and saying it shouldn't be done.
0 -
i want a maga hat cosmetic for diversity
3 -
Huh? So far the lore they have shared are about their personal lives, so why wouldn't they?
Claudette's story talks about her parents, the way she is socially inept. It talks about her fears deep within. as an example...
So I don't think there is anything wrong with adding some kind of interesting story, especially when being gay sometimes isn't something easy to deal with (for different reasons), that it inevitably becomes a big part of someone's life. Yes it's not all they are, but I can speak from experience that it shapes your lifestyle and the way you perceive things.
I think it's great that bhvr is taking a bold move in wanting more representation in their game.
3 -
I'll untwist it by saying not every character has to have a detailed backstory that explains their orientation. Not every story involves that detail, but it's nice when it does and everyone can relate :)
Great point. It would've been really cool to see a thread about it one day and explore it from there. Now it's just as you say, a matter of time now that we know.
1 -
Why do you want real-world politics in the game?
0 -
I see, so I wouldn't be constrained by lore. As my example of Dwight could still be gay, despite his crush on Rose at that particular point in time, shows that I am not tied into lore as is. Were I attached to lore strongly, that idea wouldn't be a possibility.
Secondly, the fact that I wish to identify with a character, and yet also understand others identify him as orientated in different ways also shows that there is no constraint.
Finally, I like the idea of a multiverse theory, where The Entity is actually not a Godlike construct, but actually a rather basic creature with a lot of power, just feeding and like the cult God of Silent Hill, seems to conjure things as instinct, rather than intelligent plotting and design. That's most certainly not lore, but is my reality of it, constructed as I wish.
Even if I was tied strongly to lore (which I'm not), would it be wrong for someone who did want to be engrossed in lore to see it their way? Is that not just another example of how someone wishes to see the game? Ultimately, people can view it however they wish, and I have no intention on stopping them with their reality of the game, so my reality is no more and no less important, so long as I do not dictate to others how they should see something, because denying that would be denying their right to have a viewpoint.
Hopefully, that clears it up.
0 -
I dont know if they are including just to include or not...the whole point I was making was I HOPE that thats the reason..
Because I hate it when its just a throwaway to a bigger picture.
0
