General Gaming News.

Specter Von Baren

Annoying Green Gadfly
Legacy
Aug 25, 2013
5,632
2,849
118
I don't know, send help!
Country
USA
Gender
Cuttlefish
Ah right, getting back to trend chasing. E-sports are seeing a cut back across the board. Even the big one, League of Legends, has scaled back a little. This is likely a delayed result of 2020 shaking everything enough that certain bubbles have started deflating rather than popping.

Don't know if this was already brought up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

BrawlMan

Lover of beat'em ups.
Legacy
Mar 10, 2016
26,951
11,291
118
Detroit, Michigan
Country
United States of America
Gender
Male
Ah right, getting back to trend chasing. E-sports are seeing a cut back across the board. Even the big one, League of Legends, has scaled back a little. This is likely a delayed result of 2020 shaking everything enough that certain bubbles have started deflating rather than popping.

Don't know if this was already brought up.
I know I didn't bring anything up about it, nor am I surprised. Still appreciate the news.

 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
19,624
4,432
118
"Why aren't the other 94% of the population praising how bold we are for showing two men in love!?"
Most people who watched that episode liked it. It was the usual vocal reactionaries that got pissed and started talking about being tricked into watching gayness.

Representation is cool and all, but when you're representation excludes over 90% of people you really shouldn't be surprised to find that people 1. Dont like it, 2. Don't care. 3. Aren't interested in watching a niche story for niche people.
90% of the population aren't white, straight men either, and yet... Also, niche? This was like the least flamboyantly gay couple you could get - one is Nick Offerman, for god's sake.

Not wanting to watch LBGT content doesn't make people homophobic, it just means they aren't interested in seeing it. And the more they shove that stuff into media, the less people want to watch.
If one is actively avoiding it because of the LGBTQ+ content, like say, in this episode, an episode part of a show that they were watching, but then skipped this one episode because of gay characters, then yes, that is homophobic. What if someone refuses to watch Episode 4 because it has Henry and Sam in it, and they're not racist, they just aren't interested in seeing black people? That would make one raise an eyebrow wouldn't it?

There is a difference between having LBGT or otherwise diverse characters, and it's another to make sure the audience really sees all the sexual aspects of it.
Can you point me to all those straight chracters in movies and shows where the audience DOESN'T get to see the sexual side to them? Also, two men laying ontop of eachother shirtless is hardly seeing "all the sexual aspects". That's soap opera level nudity.

Bill was a great character in TLOU game who just happened to be gay. Bill in the show is in a deep and emotional gay relationship that happens to be in the TLOU. It's like writers don't understand the difference between having a character who is gay, versus having a gay character.
Bill in the show isn't anymore or less gay than Bill in the game, we just see the actual relationship this time. The only difference is their relationship ended poorly in the game. A gay relationship, yes. And how were they supposed to make it a relationship that is gay, but not make it a gay relationship? I mean, can you have a character who is straight versus a straight character?

And in typical fashion they get upset when everyone doesn't stand and applaud your bold message on screen.
Don't give me that nonsene. You know who they're talking about here. Not those who were like 'Eh, didn't do much for me', not those who wanted more action, but those that balked at gayness in their zombie action show.
 

hanselthecaretaker

My flask is half full
Legacy
Nov 18, 2010
8,738
5,905
118
If one is actively avoiding it because of the LGBTQ+ content, like say, in this episode, an episode part of a show that they were watching, but then skipped this one episode because of gay characters, then yes, that is homophobic. What if someone refuses to watch Episode 4 because it has Henry and Sam in it, and they're not racist, they just aren't interested in seeing black people? That would make one raise an eyebrow wouldn't it?

Basically while the push for equal rights is commendable, the tactics used can act in some cases as more of an impediment to progress. I don’t know of any straight person who likes being called a homophobe for simply not wanting to watch something gay going on. While there are people (mainly extremists) who truly have an extremely irrational fear or aversion to something, it makes the “-phobic” label when used as a catch-all a bit of a misnomer. The intent is designed to be derogatory and ultimately dismissive of opposing viewpoints. It’s reminiscent of how the KGB used to call dissidents mentally ill to help insulate their ideology.

Socially we’re in some fairly volatile times which makes a defensive attitude understandable, especially on the receiving end. But if the best we can hope for is an “us” vs “them” mentality within the pursuit of acceptance, it doesn’t feel like much of anything decent is being accomplished. Rather, it feels more like being in the midst of a never ending culture war.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
19,624
4,432
118
Basically while the push for equal rights is commendable, the tactics used can act in some cases as more of an impediment to progress. I don’t know of any straight person who likes being called a homophobe for simply not wanting to watch something gay going on. While there are people (mainly extremists) who truly have an extremely irrational fear or aversion to something, it makes the “-phobic” label when used as a catch-all a bit of a misnomer. The intent is designed to be derogatory and ultimately dismissive of opposing viewpoints. It’s reminiscent of how the KGB used to call dissidents mentally ill to help insulate their ideology.

Socially we’re in some fairly volatile times which makes a defensive attitude understandable, especially on the receiving end. But if the best we can hope for is an “us” vs “them” mentality within the pursuit of acceptance, it doesn’t feel like much of anything is being accomplished.
Homophobia is not necessarily a judgement call on someone's character, it is in most instances something people are simply imprinted with. I myself have some homophobia in me; there is an initially negative gut reaction I get from watching two men kiss in a sexual way. And that's because I was raised in a society that treats two men kissing as unnatural and gross (yet two women as hot and sexy). That doesn't mean it isn't solely a me problem and a not a problem that gay men should be shackled with. And people who have this within them need to take a good hard look at themselves and realize this, and work on that part of themselves.

And please don't compare calling out homophobia to the freaking KGB, like come on. This is not telling people they HAVE to watch gay content, this is about calling out people who complain gay content is present at all, or who feel gay characters should exist under more scrutiny than straight characters, i.e. 'gay characters get pushed and forced into a story, but straight characters are always organically written in, there needs to be a reason for LGTBQ+ characters to be there'. I can assure you that 99,99% of people who complained online about the presence of gay characters in Episode 3 of The Last of Us did not do so under the guise of good faith, but because they hate seeing gay people.

Acceptance of the LGBTQ+ can not be achieved by adhiring to the tolerance of those that don't wish to accept them. I'm sorry, but those who are uncomfortable with two men kissing are just gonna have to fucking deal with it. Don't wanna watch it, don't watch it, but don't point an accusatory finger at it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan and Absent

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
10,812
5,336
118
Most people who watched that episode liked it. It was the usual vocal reactionaries that got pissed and started talking about being tricked into watching gayness.
Which makes the article pointless. A small number of people being upset that a small number of people where upset.

90% of the population aren't white, straight men either, and yet... Also, niche? This was like the least flamboyantly gay couple you could get - one is Nick Offerman, for god's sake.
I mean skin color is not relevant here. Gay of any kind is niche regardless of the flamboyancy. Nick Offerman is a national treasure people should chill out.


If one is actively avoiding it because of the LGBTQ+ content, like say, in this episode, an episode part of a show that they were watching, but then skipped this one episode because of gay characters, then yes, that is homophobic. What if someone refuses to watch Episode 4 because it has Henry and Sam in it, and they're not racist, they just aren't interested in seeing black people? That would make one raise an eyebrow wouldn't it?
These are not equal things. Many religious beliefs make homosexuality uncomfortable for people, even if they don't actively hate LBGT people IRL. Sexual content and relationships does not correlate to race so your comparison here doesn't work. It isn't fair to suggest people are bigots because they are uncomfortable watching certain content.

Can you point me to all those straight chracters in movies and shows where the audience DOESN'T get to see the sexual side to them? Also, two men laying ontop of eachother shirtless is hardly seeing "all the sexual aspects". That's soap opera level nudity.
Watch anything without sexual content in it then. I don't know what you are trying to say. There are other ways to show people being gay/straight besides them making out with people or fucking.

Bill in the show isn't anymore or less gay than Bill in the game, we just see the actual relationship this time. The only difference is their relationship ended poorly in the game. A gay relationship, yes. And how were they supposed to make it a relationship that is gay, but not make it a gay relationship?
They could just follow the game's storyline, not that hard to figure out. The game did it well imo, so why did they feel like this relationship needed most of an episode AND be completely different from the game? It completely changes Bill's character because Bill in the game is a man in love who felt betrayed by his lover bailing on him, only to find out later that he wasn't abandoned and his partner left to protect him. It's impactful because it shows the love Bill had, and the resentment of a perceived betrayal, only for a sad sense of relief at the end.

Bill in the show has none of this, it's a completely different plot (likely made for filler and runtime) and it really wasn't needed. I'm not saying it was bad, but it was a change that didn't need to happen and when you make that kind of sweeping change to the character it makes you wonder why?

Did they do this so that they didn't have Bill be a bitter gay dude the whole episode because they thought it would look bad to have such an angry bitter gay character? Did they do it for pandering reasons to showcase a different and more tender relationship on a major show for...well pandering?

It doesn't make sense, and if the relationship was in a different show that wasn't based on a popular story already, it would have been perfectly fine. I doubt anybody would care. But this always happens when they make adaptations, they change characters that people like and people do not like that shit.

Don't give me that nonsene. You know who they're talking about here. Not those who were like 'Eh, didn't do much for me', not those who wanted more action, but those that balked at gayness in their zombie action show.
It's not nonsense, they do it all the time. When Charlie's Angel's flopped they blamed men not liking all female casts, everytime something progressive gets any kind of backlash they immediately point fingers at the audience. Fuck them and fuck that.
 

Absent

And twice is the only way to live.
Jan 25, 2023
1,594
1,552
118
Country
Switzerland
Gender
The boring one
Yeah. There's a difference between "not wanting to see that" and "wanting to not see that". And it's a dangerous difference, as it's what leads to disallowing gay couples to kiss in public.

One can find certain scenes spectacularly erotic or spectacularly unerotic (I'd classify a Reeves+Moss intercourse as the latter), but it's not important. Stories tend to be about love, and no matter how you judge the physical contact, even if the imagery does nothing for you, you can still find the emotional story moving or even gut-wrenching. All the more when homosexuality adds a sad "doomed, forbidden love" aspect to it. You don't need to be aroused to feel that - in fact you can feel it for disney animals or abstract shapes. Disqualifying a story specifically because the attraction is between same-sex people goes way beyond the proclaimed "disinterest". It's downright hostility.

And it reminds me of untraconservative reactions to any minority's visibility in media. I've seen people online react with some weird "why do they force me to watch/play black characters instead of characters I can relate to" and I don't think I need to point out how creepy their discourse was, or how the majority/minority ratio wasn't really a valid argument. I don't think reactions to homosexuality are immensely different.

After all, "interracial" kisses were deemed quite shocking, in the 50s...
 

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
10,812
5,336
118
Homophobia is not necessarily a judgement call on someone's character, it is in most instances something people are simply imprinted with.
Let me ask you a question. Am I homophobic if I don't watch gay porn? I'm avoiding it because I absolutely do not want to see it, so by that logic I'm homophobic right?
 

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
10,812
5,336
118
After all, "interracial" kisses were deemed quite shocking, in the 50s...
Yeah but so was seeing a married couple in the same bed. In I Love Lucy, Lucy and Ricki slept in different twin beds, despite being married.
 

hanselthecaretaker

My flask is half full
Legacy
Nov 18, 2010
8,738
5,905
118
Yeah but so was seeing a married couple in the same bed. In I Love Lucy, Lucy and Ricki slept in different twin beds, despite being married.
I also recall (as in read about…I’m not that bloody old yet) it being a huge deal the first time a show showed a toilet. Normally acceptable things, but not necessarily for entertainment purposes at the time.
 

FakeSympathy

Elite Member
Legacy
Jun 8, 2015
3,081
2,790
118
Country
US
Speaking of Homophobia, I do think the hate towards Hogwarts Legacy is not justified, and you're an asshole if you condemn people who buy the game of being homophobes.

HOWEVER, if you are buying the game just to piss off the LGBTQ+ community, both the wholesome and toxic sides, you're also an asshole and aren't any better.

Either ignore the game or play for the purpose of entertainment. Simple as that
 
Last edited:

Specter Von Baren

Annoying Green Gadfly
Legacy
Aug 25, 2013
5,632
2,849
118
I don't know, send help!
Country
USA
Gender
Cuttlefish
Homophobia is not necessarily a judgement call on someone's character, it is in most instances something people are simply imprinted with. I myself have some homophobia in me; there is an initially negative gut reaction I get from watching two men kiss in a sexual way. And that's because I was raised in a society that treats two men kissing as unnatural and gross (yet two women as hot and sexy). That doesn't mean it isn't solely a me problem and a not a problem that gay men should be shackled with. And people who have this within them need to take a good hard look at themselves and realize this, and work on that part of themselves.

And please don't compare calling out homophobia to the freaking KGB, like come on. This is not telling people they HAVE to watch gay content, this is about calling out people who complain gay content is present at all, or who feel gay characters should exist under more scrutiny than straight characters, i.e. 'gay characters get pushed and forced into a story, but straight characters are always organically written in, there needs to be a reason for LGTBQ+ characters to be there'. I can assure you that 99,99% of people who complained online about the presence of gay characters in Episode 3 of The Last of Us did not do so under the guise of good faith, but because they hate seeing gay people.

Acceptance of the LGBTQ+ can not be achieved by adhiring to the tolerance of those that don't wish to accept them. I'm sorry, but those who are uncomfortable with two men kissing are just gonna have to fucking deal with it. Don't wanna watch it, don't watch it, but don't point an accusatory finger at it.
I literally cannot think of a single instance where someone called another person a homophobe and it wasn't intended to be a judgement of their character.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CriticalGaming

CriticalGaming

Elite Member
Legacy
Dec 28, 2017
10,812
5,336
118
Speaking of Homophobia, I do think the hate towards Hogwarts Legacy is not justified, and you're an asshole if you condemn people who buy the game of being homophobes.

HOWEVER, if you are buying the game just to piss off the LGBTQ+ community, both the wholesome and toxic sides, you're also an asshole and aren't any better.

Either ignore the game or play for the purpose of entertainment. Simple as that
I wanna fly on a magic broom!
 
  • Like
Reactions: FakeSympathy

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
19,624
4,432
118
Which makes the article pointless. A small number of people being upset that a small number of people where upset.
The article was calling out the still lingering homophobia in the gaming community, which will be a valid point for as long as homophobia exists.

I mean skin color is not relevant here. Gay of any kind is niche regardless of the flamboyancy. Nick Offerman is a national treasure people should chill out.
It's relevant in that the vast majority of western media is straight, white guys, yet straight, white guys don't make up the majority of people in western society, let alone the rest of the world. So the excuse of 'well, most people are not gay, so that's why there can't be popular gay media' is nonsense. It has nothig to do with demographics and everything with stigmatization and discrimination. Thanks religion. Speaking of...

These are not equal things. Many religious beliefs make homosexuality uncomfortable for people, even if they don't actively hate LBGT people IRL. Sexual content and relationships does not correlate to race so your comparison here doesn't work. It isn't fair to suggest people are bigots because they are uncomfortable watching certain content.
First of all, religion can piss right off if it's used as an excuse to marginalize and treat others like shit. Do not come at me with that BS. Secondly, if people feel uncomfortable with gay content, then they can not watch it. It's still homophobia, and something they need to get over, but fine. But we are not talking about that, we're talking about people who are uncomfortable with gay content claiming gay content shouldn't exist because it makes them uncomfortable. In which case they should be called out for what they are; bigots.

Watch anything without sexual content in it then. I don't know what you are trying to say. There are other ways to show people being gay/straight besides them making out with people or fucking.
Like what? Seriously, examples please of straight characters in media who don't get, and ultimately kiss, a love interest. Even WALL-E, a fricking robot, got a female love interest.

They could just follow the game's storyline, not that hard to figure out. The game did it well imo, so why did they feel like this relationship needed most of an episode AND be completely different from the game? It completely changes Bill's character because Bill in the game is a man in love who felt betrayed by his lover bailing on him, only to find out later that he wasn't abandoned and his partner left to protect him. It's impactful because it shows the love Bill had, and the resentment of a perceived betrayal, only for a sad sense of relief at the end.

Bill in the show has none of this, it's a completely different plot (likely made for filler and runtime) and it really wasn't needed. I'm not saying it was bad, but it was a change that didn't need to happen and when you make that kind of sweeping change to the character it makes you wonder why?

Did they do this so that they didn't have Bill be a bitter gay dude the whole episode because they thought it would look bad to have such an angry bitter gay character? Did they do it for pandering reasons to showcase a different and more tender relationship on a major show for...well pandering?

It doesn't make sense, and if the relationship was in a different show that wasn't based on a popular story already, it would have been perfectly fine. I doubt anybody would care. But this always happens when they make adaptations, they change characters that people like and people do not like that shit.
Then you don't remember the game, because Frank left because he hated Bill, stole his battery that he knew was important to him, and even left a note in case he would find his dead body just so he could make it known how much he hated Bill. Other than that, if it's in your own words "not bad", and the consensus is actually that it was very good, who cares? It serves the exact same purpose in the show as it did in the game; reflect on Joel's own emotional trauma.

It's not nonsense, they do it all the time. When Charlie's Angel's flopped they blamed men not liking all female casts, everytime something progressive gets any kind of backlash they immediately point fingers at the audience. Fuck them and fuck that.
Don't act like you don't know reactionaries don't ride that wave of general discontent toward a piece of media with "progressive" themes and characters like crazy. But if we stick to what you said... did The Last of Us Episode 3 flop? Judging by the general response, no it didn't. Quite the contrary actually. Now let's see what a large contingent of youtube videos who are very negative toward this episode have in common. Well, whadda ya know...

Let me ask you a question. Am I homophobic if I don't watch gay porn? I'm avoiding it because I absolutely do not want to see it, so by that logic I'm homophobic right?
No, it makes you homophobic if you think gay porn should be scrutinized because it makes others feel uncomfortable watching it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Absent

And twice is the only way to live.
Jan 25, 2023
1,594
1,552
118
Country
Switzerland
Gender
The boring one
So, either homosexual relationships in fictions are like "normally acceptable things but not necessarily for entertainment purposes at the time" (like omg toilets or omg shared bed), which would be ridiculous, or like "normally inacceptable things including for entertainment purposes" which would be godawful. Glorious. :sneaky:

Sorry, there are reasons to not watch Torchwood (and reasons to watch it, it's an okay-ish series), but if someone refuses to watch it just because not all the relationships in it are heterosexual (or lesbian 🙄), then yeah, I'd say they have some issues.

Again, you can be not aroused by male-on-male intercourses, and you can also not seek it out, but if it makes you scream and run away from a whole story, it's clearly a phobia. "Oh noes, there's a spider in the room, nobody told me there would be a spider in the room, I would NEVER have entered the room, yiiiiiiih."
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Jul 18, 2009
19,624
4,432
118
I literally cannot think of a single instance where someone called another person a homophobe and it wasn't intended to be a judgement of their character.
The two do blur. I won't say people being homophobic but not knowing any better, and then being called a homophobe in anger by someone else, doesn't occur, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't still be called out. Though I doubt many people who go out of their way to post on social media or make videos on youtube specifically to trash talk gay content for being gay could be classified as 'not knowing any better'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrawlMan