Nintendo Says No To Same Sex Relationships For Tomodachi Miis

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
Lieju said:
"We're not trying to provide social commentary", except, you know, that you are.

Such as that homosexual relationships have no place in a 'whimsical quirky world'. Only straight people allowed there.
no they are not. they have fixed a bug in which the characters have lost their "sex" code and the game didnt knew what "Sex" they were meaning they would treat these characters with every possibility. what is missing in this article and many people shouting about it is that this bug was a gamebreaking to the point where no progress was possible after it was introduced. they fixed a massive game bug that had accidental consequence of ability to marry a character to anyone since game treated it as "unknown sex". this isnt social commentary. this is game patching 101.
 

Aaron Sylvester

New member
Jul 1, 2012
786
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
I think that's fair enough. Nintendo is the developer and if they don't want same-sex relationships in their game then that is their decision.
No news there, of course everybody is free to be as discriminatory as they want. Is it good though?
Artists should be able to create what they want without being criticized for not catering to everyone's wishes and wants. We live in an era of over-reactions where people can get offended by a glass of water.

A game that doesn't have same-sex relationships available isn't necessarily homophobic, a game that has a male protagonist instead of a female one isn't necessarily sexist, a game that has the African-american character die first isn't necessarily racist, a game that has females flouting around wearing skimpy clothes isn't necessarily misogynist.

If Nintendo have gone out of their way saying "NO, HOMOSEXUAL RELATIONS ARE WRONG" then people would have a reason to get offended, but all I'm seeing here is over-reactions and assumptions. Here's a prime example:
Lieju said:
"We're not trying to provide social commentary", except, you know, that you are.

Such as that homosexual relationships have no place in a 'whimsical quirky world'. Only straight people allowed there.
...sigh.

Ultimately we are talking about videogame with fictional characters, so when people start saying "why don't those fictional videogame characters behave the way I want them to?", I find it a little hard to take them seriously.

If people want to criticize and make a fuss over something like this then they can go right ahead. But if I was in Nintendo's shoes (or really any developer) I would never bend over backwards trying to make everyone happy. I would create what I intend to create and people can judge the final product how they see fit.
 

Lieju

New member
Jan 4, 2009
3,044
0
0
Strazdas said:
Lieju said:
"We're not trying to provide social commentary", except, you know, that you are.

Such as that homosexual relationships have no place in a 'whimsical quirky world'. Only straight people allowed there.
no they are not. they have fixed a bug in which the characters have lost their "sex" code and the game didnt knew what "Sex" they were meaning they would treat these characters with every possibility. what is missing in this article and many people shouting about it is that this bug was a gamebreaking to the point where no progress was possible after it was introduced. they fixed a massive game bug that had accidental consequence of ability to marry a character to anyone since game treated it as "unknown sex". this isnt social commentary. this is game patching 101.
I know this, but what does that bug has to do with what I said?

They made the decision from the very start to make a game where relationships are the focus. They also made the choice not to include homosexual relationships.

I can see why they patched the accidental bug away, it has nothing to do with the fact that they decided to take a stance on the matter just by excluding homosexuals from their 'quirky little world' to begin with.
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
Lieju said:
Strazdas said:
Lieju said:
"We're not trying to provide social commentary", except, you know, that you are.

Such as that homosexual relationships have no place in a 'whimsical quirky world'. Only straight people allowed there.
no they are not. they have fixed a bug in which the characters have lost their "sex" code and the game didnt knew what "Sex" they were meaning they would treat these characters with every possibility. what is missing in this article and many people shouting about it is that this bug was a gamebreaking to the point where no progress was possible after it was introduced. they fixed a massive game bug that had accidental consequence of ability to marry a character to anyone since game treated it as "unknown sex". this isnt social commentary. this is game patching 101.
I know this, but what does that bug has to do with what I said?

They made the decision from the very start to make a game where relationships are the focus. They also made the choice not to include homosexual relationships.

I can see why they patched the accidental bug away, it has nothing to do with the fact that they decided to take a stance on the matter just by excluding homosexuals from their 'quirky little world' to begin with.
you said that Nintendo is providing social commentary, when in fact they are not doing anything of the sort but are actually fixing a gamebreaking bug that corrupts your saves and i even heard can damage your device.

what relationships the game allows or does not allow is not a statement in any way, its a game setup. unless you considering pretty much every game out there as a statement, which is silly. Marriage in nontraditional way is actually quite damn hard from a database engineering perspective because you need to pretty much raise the size of database 8 times to be able to flag things correctly, and thats a lot of work. a lot of extra work developer didnt bother with.

no, by not having homosexual relationship in your game you are not taking a stance against homosexuals. all you do is make incomplete game.
 

Edl01

New member
Apr 11, 2012
255
0
0
The idea that because it's Japan we should forgive Nintendo for this is just absurd. First off, Nintendo have shown willingness to change games in the past, see Bravely Default where they changed some of the costumes and removed a lot of the sexual jokes in the game. So Nintendo has no excuse for not localising features in one of their games for a, "wider audience".

Second comes the fact - Japan doesn't really a country all that big into the whole homophobia thing. I'll admit right now I don't live in the country, but in Japanese games and media you see homosexual characters all the time, most of whom are edited out for western release. Heck just do a bit of research and you'll find even hundreds of years ago in the Dark Ages homosexuality was not nearly as condemned there it is here in the west. This is not a case of Japan being a homophobic country, this is the case of Nintendo trying to appeal to the widest audience and getting what they deserve for it.
 

gargantual

New member
Jul 15, 2013
417
0
0
Let em fling mud at nintendo. At least the hyper critique'll move onto new pastures and layoff the dudebro games....

for now....

This game-representational angerfests is a little overheated than it needs to be IMO. The guy who started off this hashtag is making a sincere request in his campaign. Which a few of us out here could take note of.
where one game doesn't give options, another will. If Nintendo's appearing culturally regressive oh well but they'll likely fix their content for the sequel for their audiences sake. But its not like Nintendo is 'contractually' or 'legally' obligated to balance things out. So best not to fling accusations of homophobia, and deliberate regression at em.

and the chick fil-a comparison? Come on...really?
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
17,083
1,178
118
Country
Argentina
Aaron Sylvester said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
I think that's fair enough. Nintendo is the developer and if they don't want same-sex relationships in their game then that is their decision.
No news there, of course everybody is free to be as discriminatory as they want. Is it good though?
Ultimately we are talking about videogame with fictional characters, so when people start saying "why don't those fictional videogame characters behave the way I want them to?", I find it a little hard to take them seriously.
I find it a little hard NOT to take them seriously. The game is marketed with this line:

"Your friends. Your drama. Your life."

I'm not saying you're supposed to replicate every single aspect of your life in a game that is, ostensibly, "your life", but you should have the option right? It's a game about human relationships, I think it would've been wonderful if it would've allowed people to experience the relationships they always wanted but never had. And I guess that was the idea in the first place, but Nintendo didn't think things through.
 

deadish

New member
Dec 4, 2011
694
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
I think that's fair enough. Nintendo is the developer and if they don't want same-sex relationships in their game then that is their decision.
No news there, of course everybody is free to be as discriminatory as they want. Is it good though?
"discriminatory"? Refusing to create a product that fits your specific preferences is "discriminatory" now?

Damn Macdonlds, I demand a steak. What?! They don't serve steak? Obviously they are discriminating against steak lovers! How dare they?!!!
 

Aaron Sylvester

New member
Jul 1, 2012
786
0
0
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
I think that's fair enough. Nintendo is the developer and if they don't want same-sex relationships in their game then that is their decision.
No news there, of course everybody is free to be as discriminatory as they want. Is it good though?
Ultimately we are talking about videogame with fictional characters, so when people start saying "why don't those fictional videogame characters behave the way I want them to?", I find it a little hard to take them seriously.
I find it a little hard NOT to take them seriously. The game is marketed with this line:

"Your friends. Your drama. Your life."

I'm not saying you're supposed to replicate every single aspect of your life in a game that is, ostensibly, "your life", but you should have the option right? It's a game about human relationships, I think it would've been wonderful if it would've allowed people to experience the relationships they always wanted but never had. And I guess that was the idea in the first place, but Nintendo didn't think things through.
But Nintendo specifically said this wasn't supposed to be some kind of real-life simulator.

Yes, people are allowed to suggest homosexual relationships as an option. That is their wish/want for the game. But they are overstepping the line if they start calling it homophobic/discriminatory, which I'm glad you didn't do :p
 

deadish

New member
Dec 4, 2011
694
0
0
Saint Ganondorf said:
deadish said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
I think that's fair enough. Nintendo is the developer and if they don't want same-sex relationships in their game then that is their decision.
No news there, of course everybody is free to be as discriminatory as they want. Is it good though?
"discriminatory"? Refusing to create a product that fits your specific preferences is "discriminatory" now?

Damn Macdonlds, I demand a steak. What?! They don't serve steak? Obviously they are discriminating against steak lovers! How dare they?!!!
It's discriminatory like leaving interracial marriages out would be. Not fixing the glitch, but leaving them out in the first place.
I'm sorry. But just because the product is not to your liking doesn't make "discriminatory".

If they disallow you from buying their product/providing service, because of your race, gender, sexual orientation ... etc., yes that is discrimination. But if the product being sold isn't to your liking, that's your problem.
 

deadish

New member
Dec 4, 2011
694
0
0
Saint Ganondorf said:
deadish said:
Saint Ganondorf said:
deadish said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
I think that's fair enough. Nintendo is the developer and if they don't want same-sex relationships in their game then that is their decision.
No news there, of course everybody is free to be as discriminatory as they want. Is it good though?
"discriminatory"? Refusing to create a product that fits your specific preferences is "discriminatory" now?

Damn Macdonlds, I demand a steak. What?! They don't serve steak? Obviously they are discriminating against steak lovers! How dare they?!!!
It's discriminatory like leaving interracial marriages out would be. Not fixing the glitch, but leaving them out in the first place.
I'm sorry. But just because the product is not to your liking doesn't make "discriminatory".
Please point out where I said "Not to my liking." Stop trying to change my argument.

If they disallow you from buying their product/providing service, because of your race, gender, sexual orientation ... etc., yes that is discrimination. But if the product being sold isn't to your liking, that's your problem.
The liking thing is something of your imagination.
If it's not "not to your liking", why are you complaining in this thread? It should be a non-issue to you. Yet here you are ...

Rosa Parks is rolling in her grave.
 

deadish

New member
Dec 4, 2011
694
0
0
Saint Ganondorf said:
deadish said:
Saint Ganondorf said:
deadish said:
Saint Ganondorf said:
deadish said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
I think that's fair enough. Nintendo is the developer and if they don't want same-sex relationships in their game then that is their decision.
No news there, of course everybody is free to be as discriminatory as they want. Is it good though?
"discriminatory"? Refusing to create a product that fits your specific preferences is "discriminatory" now?

Damn Macdonlds, I demand a steak. What?! They don't serve steak? Obviously they are discriminating against steak lovers! How dare they?!!!
It's discriminatory like leaving interracial marriages out would be. Not fixing the glitch, but leaving them out in the first place.
I'm sorry. But just because the product is not to your liking doesn't make "discriminatory".
Please point out where I said "Not to my liking." Stop trying to change my argument.

If they disallow you from buying their product/providing service, because of your race, gender, sexual orientation ... etc., yes that is discrimination. But if the product being sold isn't to your liking, that's your problem.
The liking thing is something of your imagination.
If it's not "not to your liking", why are you complaining in this thread? It should be a non-issue to you. Yet here you are ...

Rosa Parks is rolling in her grave.
I pointed out how it's discrimination. You didn't address that. Me not liking something and it being discriminatory aren't mutually exclusive.

Just because you don't like that people point out you support discrimination doesn't mean it isn't true.
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy has no African-Americans in them nor any Asians. It's all white people. Should I file a lawsuit for discrimination?

I'm sorry. It's not discrimination if some subset of society isn't "represented" in a product.
 

Mike Lemond

New member
Jan 20, 2014
14
0
0
For some reason, I believed the readers of The Escapist were more intelligent than readers of most other websites. Turns out, they're just as rabid and reactionary as any other group. It's really a shame.

For all the unnecessary hatred, threats, and misdirected rage this "LMNOPQ community" has been spewing out, it's looking more and more like a terrorist organization.
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
17,083
1,178
118
Country
Argentina
deadish said:
Johnny Novgorod said:
Aaron Sylvester said:
I think that's fair enough. Nintendo is the developer and if they don't want same-sex relationships in their game then that is their decision.
No news there, of course everybody is free to be as discriminatory as they want. Is it good though?
"discriminatory"? Refusing to create a product that fits your specific preferences is "discriminatory" now?

Damn Macdonlds, I demand a steak. What?! They don't serve steak? Obviously they are discriminating against steak lovers! How dare they?!!!
That would be funny if the analogy worked, but as it stands you're comparing a product that claims to have a wider range than it actually offers, and a service that markets the only thing that it sells. Nobody thinks you can have steak at McDonald's, but a "life simulator" that needlessly limits human relationships is eye-catching.
 

Mike Lemond

New member
Jan 20, 2014
14
0
0
Saint Ganondorf said:
So it's rabid and reactionary to point out they don't view gays equally, as they aren't treating them equally, but it isn't rabid and reactionary to call mere words without threat of any violence terrorism?
No need to fly off the handle here. I believe it was William Shakespeare who said, "Calm thy tits."

But yes. That is correct. Terrorism does not have to involve physical violence. For example, if a group makes people fear for their well being for expressing an unpopular opinion.