Jimquisition: Tomodachi Strife

[BreakfastMan]

Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Changing a bunch of mii's singing to a bunch of mii's doing a rap battle is changing a bunch of text boxes.

Also changing two people dressed up in sumo outfits running into each other and pushing to two people in football outfits running into each other and pushing is just changing avatar outfits. ((also we know what sumo is out in the west nintendo ;p))

They aren't changing the hard code or core mechanics of the game, which what would be needed.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

Have you ever written a program of any size? Even changing a couple of lines here and there can create unintended bugs that can wreck the game. That's why you often see game patches that fix one problem, but cause new ones. A lot of it depends on how interconnected everything is. Mini-games could be an easy change if they don't interact with the core programming. Basically one program calling another. But any change, however trivial, made to the core program will take a lot of testing, debugging and retesting to make sure that you don't break the game.

Yes, I have. I have written quite a few programs in my day. If the programmers behind it weren't terrible, changing something like this should create few to no problems. Yes, changing a few lines can create unintended consequences... But that is why good programmers use techniques like MVC and OO, among others. To separate out functionality and logic so as to avoid most of that shit. If changing something so trivial completely breaks the game, there is likely something very wrong with the code.

Well gotta factor in also your working with a year plus old code going back to when it was starting to be created in japan, And the people editing the code, aren't the original writers of the code. Considering the wacky nature of the game and all the random events you looking at a ton of code to read and decipher with no prior knowledge of it before you can even start to say theses are the write switches you should flip.

You are implying there isn't any documentation on the code, or that the code is poorly named. Which is entirely possible, but again, that is a sign of shitty programming. It is possible the game is programmed poorly, making the change super difficult, that is never something I denied as a possibility.

Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Changing a bunch of mii's singing to a bunch of mii's doing a rap battle is changing a bunch of text boxes.

Also changing two people dressed up in sumo outfits running into each other and pushing to two people in football outfits running into each other and pushing is just changing avatar outfits. ((also we know what sumo is out in the west nintendo ;p))

They aren't changing the hard code or core mechanics of the game, which what would be needed.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

Have you ever written a program of any size? Even changing a couple of lines here and there can create unintended bugs that can wreck the game. That's why you often see game patches that fix one problem, but cause new ones. A lot of it depends on how interconnected everything is. Mini-games could be an easy change if they don't interact with the core programming. Basically one program calling another. But any change, however trivial, made to the core program will take a lot of testing, debugging and retesting to make sure that you don't break the game.

Yes, I have. I have written quite a few programs in my day. If the programmers behind it weren't terrible, changing something like this should create few to no problems. Yes, changing a few lines can create unintended consequences... But that is why good programmers use techniques like MVC and OO, among others. To separate out functionality and logic so as to avoid most of that shit. If changing something so trivial completely breaks the game, there is likely something very wrong with the code.

OK, would you mind explaining to me why changing this would be so trivial? I mean, I know I've been ignored in every post I've made on the topic (even the one I started), but I'll attempt to ask anyways. As someone who is just starting to learn code, I am curious on how something that seems integral to the game itself would be something trivial. Although part of me suspects that you don't know much about this game, I'm still curious to see how simple this game's code really is.

I don't know how trivial it is in real life. But I do know good programming practice, like "make basic business logic/rules easy to change without breaking everything" and "separate out functionality, so changes in one place shouldn't break everything" (one of the most important benefits of MVC architecture and OO programming). I also have enough intuition to know that there is invariably an if statement somewhere that checks the genders of characters to determine eligibility for marriage (the game disallows marrying any character you want, so this is obviously something that happens at one point).

 

[hazydawn]

The issue is that even if he was just focusing on the statement it reinforces the increasingly popular and very bad notion that if "If your not for us, your against us". Especially when it comes to clash with other regions and cultures that don't give a shit about Western ideals. In the case of Nintendo they make a game that is only for a Japanese audience. Japan is a place where gay marriage is illegal. As such it comes to no surprise that they don't put that feature in the game.

Would you finally shut up with your "If your not for us, your against us" bullshit? Jim and many others explained why in this issue Nintendo did not act in a neutral way.
Doesn't matter what culture you're from. The moral argumentation of whether something is wrong is still the same no matter what part of the world you are from and whether it is socially acceptable in this place.

How about I won't shut up?

Because this is exactly what I'm talking about. "It doesn't matter what culture your from" argument never works because the culture it assumes everyone has to live up to is the Western culture with no consideration for other countries in the slightest.

Ethnocentrism is quite a blindfold in a lot of situations it seems.

I'm considering what culture they are from, that's why I am lenient towards Nintendo. But that doesn't mean that what they did was not immoral. Just a little bit less. I'm talking about the degree here. Owning slaves was considered okay at a certain point in America. And the owners can be excused to a certain point because they were constantly reaffirmed by their culture that it was fine. That doesn't change the fact that slavery was and will be a gross injustice.

Whether ethical values are entirely subjective is still up for debate.
You say I come to this moral judgement because I'm from a Western Culture. Which is true in the way that it allowed me to get in contact with certain ideas and arguments I wouldn't have been able to if I came from other places. But you can't assume I chose this judgement solely because of where I was brought up. I have heard the other side of the argument on this issue and made a decision. This decision, based on all arguments I've heard and came to myself, has nothing do to with where I am from.

 

[Flunk]

Is it hard to believe that the Japanese game company would have just not thought about gay marriage when they were designing the game? Seeing as gay marriage isn't legal in Japan and there isn't really a gay marriage lobby in Japan.

I genuinely believe they didn't think about it and don't understand why anyone is upset and that's the key problem here. They're trying to apologize but they don't know why people are angry at them. Hence why the apology sounds so strange and possibly insulting.

 

[Shugo]

-snip-

 

[xaszatm]

Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Changing a bunch of mii's singing to a bunch of mii's doing a rap battle is changing a bunch of text boxes.

Also changing two people dressed up in sumo outfits running into each other and pushing to two people in football outfits running into each other and pushing is just changing avatar outfits. ((also we know what sumo is out in the west nintendo ;p))

They aren't changing the hard code or core mechanics of the game, which what would be needed.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

Have you ever written a program of any size? Even changing a couple of lines here and there can create unintended bugs that can wreck the game. That's why you often see game patches that fix one problem, but cause new ones. A lot of it depends on how interconnected everything is. Mini-games could be an easy change if they don't interact with the core programming. Basically one program calling another. But any change, however trivial, made to the core program will take a lot of testing, debugging and retesting to make sure that you don't break the game.

Yes, I have. I have written quite a few programs in my day. If the programmers behind it weren't terrible, changing something like this should create few to no problems. Yes, changing a few lines can create unintended consequences... But that is why good programmers use techniques like MVC and OO, among others. To separate out functionality and logic so as to avoid most of that shit. If changing something so trivial completely breaks the game, there is likely something very wrong with the code.

Well gotta factor in also your working with a year plus old code going back to when it was starting to be created in japan, And the people editing the code, aren't the original writers of the code. Considering the wacky nature of the game and all the random events you looking at a ton of code to read and decipher with no prior knowledge of it before you can even start to say theses are the write switches you should flip.

You are implying there isn't any documentation on the code, or that the code is poorly named. Which is entirely possible, but again, that is a sign of shitty programming. It is possible the game is programmed poorly, making the change super difficult, that is never something I denied as a possibility.

Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Changing a bunch of mii's singing to a bunch of mii's doing a rap battle is changing a bunch of text boxes.

Also changing two people dressed up in sumo outfits running into each other and pushing to two people in football outfits running into each other and pushing is just changing avatar outfits. ((also we know what sumo is out in the west nintendo ;p))

They aren't changing the hard code or core mechanics of the game, which what would be needed.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

Have you ever written a program of any size? Even changing a couple of lines here and there can create unintended bugs that can wreck the game. That's why you often see game patches that fix one problem, but cause new ones. A lot of it depends on how interconnected everything is. Mini-games could be an easy change if they don't interact with the core programming. Basically one program calling another. But any change, however trivial, made to the core program will take a lot of testing, debugging and retesting to make sure that you don't break the game.

Yes, I have. I have written quite a few programs in my day. If the programmers behind it weren't terrible, changing something like this should create few to no problems. Yes, changing a few lines can create unintended consequences... But that is why good programmers use techniques like MVC and OO, among others. To separate out functionality and logic so as to avoid most of that shit. If changing something so trivial completely breaks the game, there is likely something very wrong with the code.

OK, would you mind explaining to me why changing this would be so trivial? I mean, I know I've been ignored in every post I've made on the topic (even the one I started), but I'll attempt to ask anyways. As someone who is just starting to learn code, I am curious on how something that seems integral to the game itself would be something trivial. Although part of me suspects that you don't know much about this game, I'm still curious to see how simple this game's code really is.

I don't know how trivial it is in real life. But I do know good programming practice, like "make basic business logic/rules easy to change without breaking everything" and "separate out functionality, so changes in one place shouldn't break everything" (one of the most important benefits of MVC architecture and OO programming). I also have enough intuition to know that there is invariably an if statement somewhere that checks the genders of characters to determine eligibility for marriage (the game disallows marrying any character you want, so this is obviously something that happens at one point).

...I've got so much to learn because I didn't understand half of that. Fair enough, I'll not bug you on that aspect then. However, I still say that while the code might be easy to fix, there would still be problems in getting it fixed. The biggest problem is that the development team has long since moved on. I don't think any of them is willing to go over to a year old game to fix it solely for a few complaints, especially since they are hard at work at whatever they can do for the Wii U's current predicament. And add to the fact that if they did change that for this region, they would also have to backtrack and do the same for the Japanese version as well.

As a minor note, what is MVC and OO?

 

[BreakfastMan]

Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Changing a bunch of mii's singing to a bunch of mii's doing a rap battle is changing a bunch of text boxes.

Also changing two people dressed up in sumo outfits running into each other and pushing to two people in football outfits running into each other and pushing is just changing avatar outfits. ((also we know what sumo is out in the west nintendo ;p))

They aren't changing the hard code or core mechanics of the game, which what would be needed.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

Have you ever written a program of any size? Even changing a couple of lines here and there can create unintended bugs that can wreck the game. That's why you often see game patches that fix one problem, but cause new ones. A lot of it depends on how interconnected everything is. Mini-games could be an easy change if they don't interact with the core programming. Basically one program calling another. But any change, however trivial, made to the core program will take a lot of testing, debugging and retesting to make sure that you don't break the game.

Yes, I have. I have written quite a few programs in my day. If the programmers behind it weren't terrible, changing something like this should create few to no problems. Yes, changing a few lines can create unintended consequences... But that is why good programmers use techniques like MVC and OO, among others. To separate out functionality and logic so as to avoid most of that shit. If changing something so trivial completely breaks the game, there is likely something very wrong with the code.

Well gotta factor in also your working with a year plus old code going back to when it was starting to be created in japan, And the people editing the code, aren't the original writers of the code. Considering the wacky nature of the game and all the random events you looking at a ton of code to read and decipher with no prior knowledge of it before you can even start to say theses are the write switches you should flip.

You are implying there isn't any documentation on the code, or that the code is poorly named. Which is entirely possible, but again, that is a sign of shitty programming. It is possible the game is programmed poorly, making the change super difficult, that is never something I denied as a possibility.

Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Changing a bunch of mii's singing to a bunch of mii's doing a rap battle is changing a bunch of text boxes.

Also changing two people dressed up in sumo outfits running into each other and pushing to two people in football outfits running into each other and pushing is just changing avatar outfits. ((also we know what sumo is out in the west nintendo ;p))

They aren't changing the hard code or core mechanics of the game, which what would be needed.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

Have you ever written a program of any size? Even changing a couple of lines here and there can create unintended bugs that can wreck the game. That's why you often see game patches that fix one problem, but cause new ones. A lot of it depends on how interconnected everything is. Mini-games could be an easy change if they don't interact with the core programming. Basically one program calling another. But any change, however trivial, made to the core program will take a lot of testing, debugging and retesting to make sure that you don't break the game.

Yes, I have. I have written quite a few programs in my day. If the programmers behind it weren't terrible, changing something like this should create few to no problems. Yes, changing a few lines can create unintended consequences... But that is why good programmers use techniques like MVC and OO, among others. To separate out functionality and logic so as to avoid most of that shit. If changing something so trivial completely breaks the game, there is likely something very wrong with the code.

OK, would you mind explaining to me why changing this would be so trivial? I mean, I know I've been ignored in every post I've made on the topic (even the one I started), but I'll attempt to ask anyways. As someone who is just starting to learn code, I am curious on how something that seems integral to the game itself would be something trivial. Although part of me suspects that you don't know much about this game, I'm still curious to see how simple this game's code really is.

I don't know how trivial it is in real life. But I do know good programming practice, like "make basic business logic/rules easy to change without breaking everything" and "separate out functionality, so changes in one place shouldn't break everything" (one of the most important benefits of MVC architecture and OO programming). I also have enough intuition to know that there is invariably an if statement somewhere that checks the genders of characters to determine eligibility for marriage (the game disallows marrying any character you want, so this is obviously something that happens at one point).

...I've got so much to learn because I didn't understand half of that. Fair enough, I'll not bug you on that aspect then. However, I still say that while the code might be easy to fix, there would still be problems in getting it fixed. The biggest problem is that the development team has long since moved on. I don't think any of them is willing to go over to a year old game to fix it solely for a few complaints, especially since they are hard at work at whatever they can do for the Wii U's current predicament. And add to the fact that if they did change that for this region, they would also have to backtrack and do the same for the Japanese version as well.

They are making changes to the game for the US release, however. And many other games have made changes to make it more appropriate for US culture in the past.

As a minor note, what is MVC and OO?

MVC = Model View Controller. It is a pattern to structure a piece of software. Basically, you separate the actual functionality into the model, the view, and the controller. The view contains all of the forward-facing functionality like UI, while the model contains all the backend stuff like interactions with the disc and memory. The controller handles all the stuff in-between that. View only interactions with the controller, and the model only interacts with the controller as well. This basically means that if you make a change to how the UI works, you shouldn't have to make a change to what the controller or model (unless you change the interface), because their functionality isn't dependent on the specifics of how the UI works.

OO = Object oriented. It is a way of programming. Basically, you separate functionality into different "objects". These objects can have different functions and variables attached to the object.

 

[Redd the Sock]

Okay, finally home to watch this.

Jim, you're wrong on one thing. Being gay isn't the issue it once was (though not "not an issue"), but gay marriage really still is. Polls still average out to about 1/3 people being against it in America, and at a time when everyone wants to move the social needle one way or another, there was no way to make this kind of product without someone taking it to a political realm. Sorry, but once the topic came up, it's really doubtful the internet would be quiet if Nintendo solely cited technical reasons. Just read this thread with has an argument about if such a change would be easy or hard, with the side thinking it'd be easy getting a bit accusatory.

I get not being happy with how slow things are progressing, and the difficulty in living through that transition, but saying "it's [insert date] why doesn't everyone think the way I think is right yet" is not helpful. Yeah, a lot of progress has been made, but I'm not convinced an E rated game that allowed gay marriage wouldn't be removed from various Wal-mart shelves.

 

[SamTheNewb]

After skimming some of the posts about fact checking on this thread, I was puzzled and had to take a second look at re-watch the video. And, I have to say, do I have to transcribe the video for you, because you can't be bothered enough to re-examine what you watched before making accusations?

Citing bugs that affected the larger game, it wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. Nintendo patched gay marriage out of the Japanese version of Tomadachi Life.

So much for Jim not representing the facts...

And by the way, by my own analysis, the only reason the bug and patching is mentioned is because it is needed to contextualize Nintendo's statement. Jim doesn't make any clear commentary about the patch itself, but it is put forth in this video as a factual context for the rest of the video. The discussion of this bug and response runs from video time 0:40 to 1:35, or about 55 seconds.

Jim's commentary about Nintendo's statements run from 1:35 to 4:40. From 4:40 to 8:00 Jim talks about the subject in a broader sense only using Nintendo as an example for his discussions.

All in all, Jim doesn't make a big deal about the patch itself. And thank God that Jim is allowed to represent his own beliefs, even in a professional setting.

 

[Therumancer]

[
I'm really hoping you're not saying we should turn our backs on equal treatment in order to placate people.



I have never seen an argument that gay people should be shown in "equal number", and I'm pretty well informed on this subject. I'm pretty certain that's just an imaginary argument, invented by people who want to smear the cause for gay representation.



May I just ask-- do you consider it "intrusive straight content" when a straight character flirts with your character in a game, or does the sexuality of it simply not enter into it when it's straight?



You are deliberately associating me-- and anyone else who loves the same gender, through no choice of their own-- with those actions. You cannot just say something so incredibly hurtful, and personal, and then say you're not going to "get into" it.

I trimmed a lot of this down to the basics. Right here your basically trying to claim "well, wait we aren't demanding equal representation" but then trying to turn around and make arguments about "intrusive heterosexual content". That's pretty much contradictory. After all if your acknowledging that your not an equal portion of the population, you can't very well make arguments based around there being content directed at the majority. Your more or less making my point for me, your saying "we represent a tiny percentage of the population, yet we demand equal representation in media to the overwhelming majority".

Simply put homosexuals represent a very small group of people, and an alternative lifestyle. It is not a mainstream thing, or a normal way to live. Whether homosexuals are born that way or not, it is not "normal" nor do they represent any kind of major societal force. People have a right to live how they want and mind their own business. One should not be rounding up gays just because they are gay, HOWEVER, this does not mean the rest of society should be forced to act like there are as many gays as straight people, or that it is in any way mainstream, nor are gays entitled to see homosexual options presented every time the issue of relationships comes up. Realistically speaking, most people find homosexuality disgusting, and try to avoid it, however they don't care what homosexuals do as long as it doesn't involve them. As a result it can be a detriment to a product to wave this garbage around in someone's face whenever romance comes up, because to your typical guy watching two dudes make out is just gross. It shouldn't be illegal to produce that kind of content if the designer wants to and feels it fits the subject, but it's by no means required or any kind of moral responsibility. Not showing homosexuality is in no means an attack, it just means something isn't involving a fringe of society. Also people need to understand that the "customers who want this kind of content" who a company is missing the sales from generally speaking don't equate the customers they are going to lose by having a game where they get continually propositioned by someone of their own gender. This is to say nothing of the international issues I mentioned, as a result it shouldn't be surprising when a company decides to omit content that presents a societal
fringe as being normal, when it's really not. Putting gays into everything rapidly becomes a political issue because it's promoting some people's views of the world over those of others.

In short, it doesn't matter how you live, and what you do in the bedroom, and frankly if someone wants to put gay content into a game or whatever they have the right to, but they are under no moral obligation to do so, or to try and present gays as being mainstream when they are not. Gays have the right to not be inherently criminalized, but that does not mean society has any obligation to grant them status or representation beyond their tiny numbers and minimal presence in society.

You might not like the comparison to Polygamy, and find it "hurtful" but you know, I honestly don't care much if people get upset with me not being politically correct. I generally don't suffer much guilt from pretty much telling people when they are going too far as a group. The point to the comparison is that Polygamists are a much bigger societal phenomena than gays will ever likely be as they outnumber homosexuals by thousands to one. Polygamy forms the backbone of entire societies and ways of life that have gone on for thousands of years, and globally speaking is more common and better accepted than homosexuality in an absolute sense. You might be "hurt" by it's negative connotations, but to be honest it can be presented as far more normal, part of the human experience, and a backbone for day to day existence than homosexuality will ever be. To be fair, I don't much support the idea of Polygamy being an option in most video games, but basically if your going to use the argument "we're out there and thus entitled to representation" numerically speaking gays are way to the back of the line, especially when your considering things globally. That's why it's a political issue, and largely one connected to the first world. To be fair homosexuals have been one of the best represented groups in recent years, to the point where it's ridiculous to be upset about things like what's going on with this game. Nobody is "erasing" you because gays aren't involved in something dealing with life, it's just that for the most part gays aren't involved in life day to day for most people. Indeed if you somehow were able to drop every human being on the planet into one room, I'd likely run into dozens of Polygamists before I ran into a single gay person... Gays might want to pretend they are as common and mainstream as heterosexuals and try and see the media propagate this, but that's not the way it is. Trying to get involved in everything to a point well beyond the numbers is what breeds enemies more than actual bigotry.

... and yeah, despite this post I'm not going to get into it much more. I mean news flash, not everyone is politically correct. I'm not, and that's been known for years. What's more I've said most of this stuff before, so it's really not worth going into again. I'm mostly just saying that as much as I generally agree with Jim Sterling, I think this whole issue is a non-issue because one shouldn't act like Nintendo is under any moral obligation to represent minority behaviors in their game. Trying to say that people are obligated that way is the very definition of a political argument, and pushing a specific view of social justice against others. Claiming that it's not political and acting like it's insulting for stating the obvious is just silly. Besides I honestly get tired of homosexuals talking about how hurtful they find things, when those same people don't seem to give two shakes of a rat's tail about all the people they disgust by forcing content on the majority as an entitlement. At the end of the day when it comes down to content that appeals to a few people, but bugs the rest, it's pretty obvious that this content isn't going to be inserted into everything. The majority of these conflicts aren't about the right of gays to exist, or to say that people can't produce this content if they want to, but about the implication that this content has to be brought into everything and it's bigoted not to do it. Indeed going by the way the whole "ToR" thing turned out it seems like a lot of gays absolutely revel in harassing the majority and that's half the point. The problem with the Makeb content was specifically that it was inserted tastefully for a minority of people that wanted it, and not inserted in a way that was going to infringe on the majority of players and their comfort. It was also a huge gesture given that the writers (who are hardly homophobic as they have proven) produced such content before when they thought it was appropriate... that entire battle was based around pure entitlement combined with a desire for harassment.

 

[malnin]

After skimming some of the posts about fact checking on this thread, I was puzzled and had to take a second look at re-watch the video. And, I have to say, do I have to transcribe the video for you, because you can't be bothered enough to re-examine what you watched before making accusations?

Citing bugs that affected the larger game, it wasn't supposed to be there in the first place. Nintendo patched gay marriage out of the Japanese version of Tomadachi Life.

So much for Jim not representing the facts...

And by the way, by my own analysis, the only reason the bug and patching is mentioned is because it is needed to contextualize Nintendo's statement. Jim doesn't make any clear commentary about the patch itself, but it is put forth in this video as a factual context for the rest of the video. The discussion of this bug and response runs from video time 0:40 to 1:35, or about 55 seconds.

Jim's commentary about Nintendo's statements run from 1:35 to 4:40. From 4:40 to 8:00 Jim talks about the subject in a broader sense only using Nintendo as an example for his discussions.

All in all, Jim doesn't make a big deal about the patch itself. And thank God that Jim is allowed to represent his own beliefs, even in a professional setting.

He heavily mentions the patch removes the ability to the ability to make male characters marry and only mentions the bug in passing. Using terms like "edited it out". When the patch didn't actually allow for gay marriages but turned some male characters into female. Ironically if the bug affected two characters they still couldn't marry. The point of the video is that inclusion should be the norm not the exception. But because he did a poor job of representing the facts the conversation become completely derailed.

 

[Something Amyss]

"Bisexual" is such a small and limited term, hardly worthy of the majesty of Jim. How about "gender dismorphic bigenitalian pansexual"?

Not marvelous enough for his stature. Howabout "He of omnibenevolent sexual prowess?"

And congratulations on failing to realize Miiquality's goals! A video that stated in big, bold letters to not boycott the game now will be boycotted, making it that more likely that another game in this series will never see light of day across the states.

If same-sex marriage is a significant enough issue in a game to hurt its sales that much, Nintendo is flat-out stupid for not paying attention to it.

But I think you're giving it too much credit at this point.

Discrimination is rampant in an unregulated market, and we've since realized that equal treatment is one of the market rules we have to enforce by law.

While I think the unregulated market is troublesome, I'm not sure this specific statement is true. The fact is, we've got numerous examples of people finding economic pressure for expressing their personal views, and homosexuality is only becoming more accepted amongst the mainstream community. We've seen similar pushbacks with blacks and hispanics. An unregulated market isn't the problem, it's the people involved. Especially when you consider that a regulated market has led to the FCC's rulings on the net, the free religion clause Jim mentioned, and "breathing while brown" laws.

And as you point out, discrimination was cool with the facist states at the time, too. It was a worldwide thing, regardless of your political system or your economic system.

Which doesn't explain Nintendo's comments. If this was all true why didn't they explain all this instead of giving the emptyheaded response we saw?

There are any number of reasons, but the simplest would appear to be that nobody thought it would be a big deal so they put no thought into it.

 

[The Lunatic]

I find it interesting that, people keep bringing up American politics about gay rights.

The game is going to be released in the west.

"The West" is not just America.

There are significantly more liberal parts of "The West" than America, the idea that we should all be brought down due to a certain countries backwardness is kinda dumb.

 

[atavax]

i know what its like to feel excluded in videogames. i like really difficult games. Games that are difficult not because you have to learn the sequences of boss fights but because but that require excellent use of your controls. Most videogames leave me out. Even videogames in genres that used to be most rewarding, where there is no good reason not to include mechanics for me; they don't add any difficult mechanics and exclude my kind.

 

[Strazdas]

Jim you are wrong.
You were never able to have same sex relationships in this game. the only way to do that was to abuse a bug which removed sex id from a character and made the game confused. this resulted in: males getting pregnant. save corruption, in some instances of damaging the actual hardware. this bug NEEDED to be patched out. it was damaging to the game.

im as much a nintendo hater as it comes but when its not their fault its not their fault.

The game never "denied" or "discriminated". it simply was never programmed to do that. the worst crime here is programmer being lazy.

you are also wrong about it being the default option too. for that to be true you need to have wast majority of people to agree with it. and while it certainly got better in last years, most of the world still does not support gay marriage. so default option is to keep it out actually.

 

[Something Amyss]

Have you ever written a program of any size? Even changing a couple of lines here and there can create unintended bugs that can wreck the game. That's why you often see game patches that fix one problem, but cause new ones. A lot of it depends on how interconnected everything is. Mini-games could be an easy change if they don't interact with the core programming. Basically one program calling another. But any change, however trivial, made to the core program will take a lot of testing, debugging and retesting to make sure that you don't break the game.

A shame Nintendo doesn't hire professionals, then.

Of course, there was the issue that they didn't test the game sufficiently to detect a game-breaking, Ds destroying bug, so maybe that's not surprising?

Because this is exactly what I'm talking about. "It doesn't matter what culture your from" argument never works because the culture it assumes everyone has to live up to is the Western culture with no consideration for other countries in the slightest.

Are you okay with female genital mutilation? Pedophilia? Howabout the existing slave trade?

Are these okay simply because they're part of other cultures?

But that doesn't mean that what they did was not immoral.

Unless morality is objective, and I would have trouble arguing it was, then it's hard to argue it wasn't immoral without bringing ethnocentrism back into the mix. I mean, it does look like you're going the objectivity route, but if you acknowledge that slave owners have leeway because they were told it was correct you're getting into iffy territory.

Morality is largely a social construct we agree upon. That's why it was considered moral to own slaves, to treat women like property, and why it's still considered moral to kill gays in parts of the world.

Polls still average out to about 1/3 people being against it in America

Where are you getting those numbers? Almost every recent poll I've seen is close to the halfway mark, so I'm having trouble believing that the average comes out to 1/3.

 

[michael87cn]

I think if someone wants to make a video game that doesn't feature something, they should be able to. I don't think anyone has the right to tell someone else how to make something. If they want to make something that includes something, they have that right to work hard and make that, not to sit on their butt and go "you know what, you didn't include , you really have to. right now. or else."

Really, nothing is perfect and nothing is going to cater to everyone 100% perfectly. Expecting this is ridiculous. Sorry Jim? I actually think it is a herculean effort to ask media to cater to every human being. Somewhere, somehow someone is going to feel left out, that's a part of life...

What's screwed up? Villainizing people because you disagree with how they make something.

You know what? I'm just going to come right out and say it. I think that homosexuals will survive if they aren't included in every single piece of media. My demographic isn't, and I somehow get by. I'm perfectly fine with media existing that doesn't include me (such as certain tv shows). I think it's kind of childish to throw a fit because something doesn't include you. It's like you're showing up to a party you weren't invited for, and you're ruining everyone elses fun. You know what? Too bad. You can't be everyones friend, and you can't get everything your way. It's just how life works, not just for gay people, but for everyone.

 

[DOOM GUY]

I still feel this whole issue was blown way out of proportion, it should just be dropped. If Nintendo doesn't want to include gay marriage in the game, they don't have to, simple as that.

 

[Something Amyss]

We said the same thing a century ago about homosexuality. Hmm. Hmm, I say.

Of course, that doesn't mean that they will ever discover that there is any genetic or mental marker signifying their cucumberness.

To borrow a line, just because some geniuses were called fools does not mean all fools are geniuses.

And straight people a century ago couldn't even know what it was truly like to be homosexual, since such an existence was alien to them.

That's incorrect, I'm just not sure in which of two ways. Homosexuality has been recognised as far back as the Greek and Roman empires, and likely beyond that.

On the other hand, it's technically true that homosexuality was alien to heterosexuals, but it still is. I mean, monosexuality is alien to me. Before anyone draws the wrong conclusion here, that doesn't mean I hate people who are attracted to only one sex. I just can't picture it.

You mean like we should treat it as a mental disease and send them to therapy and special camps to try to cure them?

Can you cite any studies on the matter? I mean, part of the problem with the comparison is that the efficacy of these "treatments" for homosexuality have never been demonstrated. If it can be effectively treated, the comparison to homosexuality is a false once, much like comparing body dysmorphia to gender dysphoria, as the former responds to treatment and the latter does not. We don't need to study or even know about genetics or brain chemistry for this to work (Which is also true about gender identity and sexuality). The problem with diagnoses in the past is that they worked backwards from a conclusion, and we can control that.

If it can't pass those tests, it likely won't in 100 years.

And even then, I'm not saying "treat otherkin and therians like shit," I'm just saying this is a weak premise.

 

[Strazdas]

you are also wrong about it being the default option too. for that to be true you need to have wast majority of people to agree with it. and while it certainly got better in last years, most of the world still does not support gay marriage. so default option is to keep it out actually.

That might technically be true, but how much of that comes from third world countries that haven't even grasped the concept of the democratic process, freedom of speech/expression, and basic equality period? You and I see eye to eye on a lot of things Straz, and believe me when I have a severe distaste for the phrase 'civilized nation,' but a lot of those places that make up the majority are behind the times to say the LEAST.

well lets see. just a couple years ago 52% of california inhabitants voted agaisnt gay marriage. Majority of the states do not recognize gay marriage. outsidce of north america, EU is pretty much the only place where gay marriage is accepted, and even then only in some parts of it. for example here in eastern europe majority of people still consider them mental patients (seriuosly, i hope you never have to hear the stupidty they say around here). and lets not even get into south america where you can get run out of the country for openly supporting gay rights.
The majority of haters are hardly concentrated in african tribal nations. Like i said, its been getting better, but its still far from default option.
Oh, and Nintendo is Japan company, so lets look at Japan. Same Sex relationship is legal, marriage is not. Sexual orientation rights exist only in few cities. Most of thier home country seems to not agree or at least not make it legal. Its completely possible that the programmers working on it were these people and thus they simply did not incorporate same sex marriage into the game.

 

[Sticky]

Snip

But the team was already adding development features :/ They already did what you said they never do.

http://nintendoeverything.com/bill-trinen-talks-more-about-tomodachi-lifes-localization-changes/

They are changing mini games to entirely new ones. They are developing the game for a western audience. Your post makes so sense when this is the case.

Changing a bunch of mii's singing to a bunch of mii's doing a rap battle is changing a bunch of text boxes.

Also changing two people dressed up in sumo outfits running into each other and pushing to two people in football outfits running into each other and pushing is just changing avatar outfits. ((also we know what sumo is out in the west nintendo ;p))

They aren't changing the hard code or core mechanics of the game, which what would be needed.

This doesn't make any sense. Like, at all. Unless the programmers behind tomodatchi life are idiots, allowing gay marriage shouldn't require more code changes than a couple of lines here and there. Which is about as much as those other changes would require. I mean, it should just require a change to some if statements. That really should be it.

Thank you non-programmer for sharing your knowledge on this programming related matter.

No, it's not as simple as 'changing a couple of text boxes'. The game was randomly assigning genders to the characters, it just so happened that sometimes you could make two males marry due to the nature of the random gender assignment.

To make this game recognize gay marriage, you would have had to change the data structure which the game interprets in order to correctly have it identify any gender as marriageable. THEN you would have to literally re-write in the game's logic what it means to get married. To the game, who only deals in absolutes, marriage is only for two clumps of data structures that have opposite gender tags. The game is merely instructions that has no common sense to interpret it any other way.

Source: The IGN article which talks about this in-depth. http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/05/05/nintendo-on-gay-marriage-and-tomodachi-life

This isn't to mention the other problem: because the game was randomly assigning gender tags, this was resulting in crashes and hardware instability. Because a male having a female tag is unexpected behavior to the system and it doesn't know how to recover from this.

So no, it's not just "changing a couple of text boxes". We're talking an entire round of development just to change this one feature. Localization teams, once again, don't add features to games or to the original design document.

The ONLY EXCEPTION that has been brought to my attention recently is what XSEED is doing to one of their games, the difference is that XSEED is basically a development studio on it's own that has purchased the rights to the code they are working on. Localization companies barely every see the system code of anything they create, only the code for the front-end of the game they are working on (such as the menus, etc).

Yes, I have. I have written quite a few programs in my day. If the programmers behind it weren't terrible, changing something like this should create few to no problems. Yes, changing a few lines can create unintended consequences... But that is why good programmers use techniques like MVC and OO, among others. To separate out functionality and logic so as to avoid most of that shit. If changing something so trivial completely breaks the game, there is likely something very wrong with the code.

And no, you can't say "BUT IN MY DAY CHANGING SOMETHING LIKE THIS SHOULD CAUSE NO PROBLEMS AT ALL!" And still retain any credibility that you're a credible programmer. And then pretend that you know what MVC and OO has to do with this discussion. Or are you seriously trying to say that this game, likely written in C++, doesn't use OBJECTS?

Like, the professional game company, that writes dozens of games and millions of lines of code, doesn't know about the glories of object-oriented programming in the age of visual debuggers and the internet? That is really all I'm reading from your post: You somehow think that using 'OO' would have fixed a problem that is likely being caused by objects not being interpreted correctly in the first place. Then you turn around and say "I'm a credible programmer, honest!".

Also "Something so trivial shouldn't break the code if you do it right" is only something someone would say if they haven't ever had to pull their hair out trying to understand why a program refuses to compile.

I don't know how trivial it is in real life. But I do know good programming practice, like "make basic business logic/rules easy to change without breaking everything" and "separate out functionality, so changes in one place shouldn't break everything" (one of the most important benefits of MVC architecture and OO programming). I also have enough intuition to know that there is invariably an if statement somewhere that checks the genders of characters to determine eligibility for marriage (the game disallows marrying any character you want, so this is obviously something that happens at one point).

Your "intuition" needs a few touch-ups from Dr Bullshit if you plan on seriously trying to convince us you know what you are talking about at this point. You're basically saying that programmers from Nintendo, who would consider themselves highly professional people that have landed one of the best programming jobs anyone could ask for, are slobs that don't know about objects or commenting their code. Either of these practices being something that is required to not be thrown out of any business that considers themselves professional.

While, that in mind, you continue to insist that their code must be 'poor' because this change, which involves re-writing the way marriage logic works in the game, should be "Easy" by your standards and therefore the LOCALIZATION company; of which the localization company has no responsibility or authority to modify the code base without the original developers consent, should be implementing it.

To me, the insistence that this is the job of the localization company is baffling and I can't see why anyone continues to insist that they have any responsibility in this at all to 'fix' it.