https://www.resetera.com/threads/vampire-the-masquerade-bloodlines-2-taking-a-firm-political-progressive-stance-standing-for-lgbt-rights-mental-illness-representation.106919/
People who worry about the game being political are kind of missing the point of Vampire, I think, besides.
Correct, and let me try to be as clear as possible. [...]Sure! I was making a general statement, it wasn't in response to your post. I can get a little bit passionate sometimes, but so, do let me know if I ever step out of line. :vampsmile:
I think all of what's been said sounds cool - but calling the choice of clan "an informed decision" is weird to me, like they're redressing a game mechanic to seem progressive. It doesn't make a lot of sense, but I could very well be overinterpreting this...
People who worry about the game being political are kind of missing the point of Vampire, I think, besides.
Bloodlines itself was progressive enough for its time, in my opinion - aside from making every non-white character a racial stereotype, and the "being mentally ill is so quirky" vibe of the Malkavian PC, which is an attitude that none of the other Malkavians in the game reflect, anyway.
It was at least inclusive, and made these characters more than just gags by nature of their (sub)plot involvement and the fantastic dialogue. You interacted with them, which gave them depth, and the PC typically didn't treat anything as an outright joke.
I'm sure Bloodlines 2 is going to be as progressive as the original was by simple inclusion of these characters and themes, but by today's standards, meaning they'll be a bit less caricatured. There's nothing really scary about that.
Well, I've actually enjoyed the republican jokes on the first one.... :razz:
Personally, I'm fine with LGBT themes, racial themes, and class themes, considering they exist as real issues IRL. I just hope that we are not forced to condone or condemn certain political stances, and I also hope that the devs don't push their particular views on the player, whatever they may be. Basically, if what you say is true, then that is absolutely fine. There is a HUGE difference between mere presence and advocacy. And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.
Personally, I'm fine with LGBT themes, racial themes, and class themes, considering they exist as real issues IRL. I just hope that we are not forced to condone or condemn certain political stances, and I also hope that the devs don't push their particular views on the player, whatever they may be. Basically, if what you say is true, then that is absolutely fine. There is a HUGE difference between mere presence and advocacy. And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.
I agree - well, in principle at least. It's kind of a slippery slope though, in my opinion, trying to determine what it means, exactly, to push a viewpoint.
For example, if you stumble upon a gay character and none of the dialogue options lets you call them a faggot/dyke, is there an agenda hidden there, or was it just something the developers didn't end up letting you do for whatever other reason?
There would no doubt be people (a lot of people, in my experience) who would take such an instance as having progressive politics forced on them - because, to them, presence is largely equal to advocacy, regardless of context.
At the end of the day, you can't please both the person living under a rock and the person straddled atop their high horse, so however the developers choose to approach any sensitive issue is really their prerogative...
Hell, arguably the best ending in the original Bloodlines (ignoring the Independent ending for the sake of the argument) has you aligning with the Anarchs, who are analogous to the real-life left wing, anyway. There's already a precedent, there, which the critics on STEAM and elsewhere are very conveniently forgetting. :justabite:
TL;DR: We're probably not gonna see anything from Death Mask Productions in this sequel, because snuff films are decidedly risky territory to explore, as are certain other things.
You know what, though? I'm fine with that - I don't think it's gonna take much away from the game overall if they play a few things safer than maybe they could have.
Gehenna is not upon us because there's a gay and/or black person in a video game for inclusivity's sake, basically.
And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.Myself consider psychiatry and psychology nothing but pseudo-disciplines and a huge rack, for this very reason found a Malkavian PC who is a walking parody on both plus common stereotypes so funny. This stuff is overused, still in this particular case it was done genuinely nice. Nothing beats a well-twisted stereotype.
As for another question, I'm ok with gay characters in videogames as long as it isn't enforced or somehow shoved in my face (like an infamous Anders from DA2), but I'm strongly against LGBT characters, for the reason that LGBT (as opposed to gay or anything else) means exactly that - a walking agenda.
Speaking of snowflakes, Candy Narwhal, you're not the only oddball here, I don't identify myself below the belt (with my gender, in other words), nor with my name, legal or otherwise, nor with usual bunch of stuff the most of people identify themselves with. So, there's no flag for me, and if I were to take my real form, I would have to somehow turn myself into a black hole that consumes what's called reality itself.
Do you consider yourself a walking agenda, then, since gender non-conformity as a concept generally falls under the umbrella of LGBT identities?Ha! Exactly like a Camarilla, who claim that everyone belongs to it regardless want they or not. People are only people, but communities and movements are the whole different matter - they have guidelines, politics, and, consequently, agendas, hence the differentiation. This abbreviation today is not much an umbrella term for gender non-conformity, but denotes a certain movement.
I'm not sure why you would conflate LGBT identity with LGBT politics to begin with - isn't it just simpler to say that you don't identify with the movement?
And honestly, the stereotypes and the Malkavian PC grated me anyway, so not using those sounds like a plus regardless.As for another question, I'm ok with gay characters in videogames as long as it isn't enforced or somehow shoved in my face
Heterosexuality gets shoved in player faces all the time and has been for decades, so I am always pretty happy when a game lets us make non-heterosexual choices if we want. And not due to any personal politics. Just due to the fact that I am a gay male and so getting to play that in a game makes it all the more fun for me. Fun, and not politics is my motivator in this regard.
If you don't mind my asking, what do you mean by "enforced"?Should I give the same example the third time in this thread? Same devs, Zevran (DA1) vs Anders (DA2), the difference is so hard to miss it could serve as a textbook one.
Heterosexuality gets shoved in player faces all the time and has been for decades, so I am always pretty happy when a game lets us make non-heterosexual choices if we want. And not due to any personal politics. Just due to the fact that I am a gay male and so getting to play that in a game makes it all the more fun for me. Fun, and not politics is my motivator in this regard.
Not understanding these are only extra choices who doesn't replace the traditional ones, other than these narrow minded people have never experienced and suffered these painful experiences, it's the actual problem. But it's also true it's impossible to force narrow minded people to change their mentality since their mind cannot process these concepts.... And don't get me wrong: even if I'm a white hetero I still fell anger when injustices happens. I just wish there would be a better way to make these people understand the world other than theirs.
(I hope my english is up to explain perfectly my theory on this complicate issue)
If you don't mind my asking, what do you mean by "enforced"?Should I give the same example the third time in this thread? Same devs, Zevran (DA1) vs Anders (DA2), the difference is so hard to miss it could serve as a textbook one.
As for the Bloodlines scene, that's called a reasonably safe generic. Reasonably, because there's still some people with a distaste for such a scenes overall. There isn't any romance plots here, the topic is played mostly for comedy,
it's, thankfully, not one of BioWare games which romance sub-plots are more popular (and, sometimes, given more attention from devs) than a main, so I won't be the one to complain about the lack of extra options in this regard.
Same with the abundance of AC/DC women, a yet another spin on a well-known cliche. Moreso, barely a single seduction option does not border trash comedy, not to say even remotely serious.
Also, how do you feel about it when a game shoves heterosexuality in the player's face?
If you say there's a majority of heteros I can believe it, if you say at least 95% of people are heteros I cannot
I would not say there is shoved or enforced heterosexuality in video gaming industry. It just happens that the vast majority of human species (95%-97%) is heterosexual. So developers sell that which is relatable to the vast majority, which heterosexuality by nature is.
Be as it may that they're pandering to the majority - that doesn't mean heterosexuality isn't shoved in our faces.Not entirely, a pointlessly sexed-up content means sexuality, without the first part, is being showed in our faces. Since pandering to majority only was more usual until recent, uh, progressive (in a loud whisper: cri$is) developments, guess which sort it was. Nothing has changed, same balls, now from a side view.
Also, how do you feel about it when a game shoves heterosexuality in the player's face?
I would not say there is shoved or enforced heterosexuality in video gaming industry. It just happens that the vast majority of human species (95%-97%) is heterosexual. So developers sell that which is relatable to the vast majority, which heterosexuality by nature is.
I would not say there is shoved or enforced heterosexuality in video gaming industry. It just happens that the vast majority of human species (95%-97%) is heterosexual. So developers sell that which is relatable to the vast majority, which heterosexuality by nature is.
Be as it may that they're pandering to the majority - that doesn't mean heterosexuality isn't shoved in our faces.
I am curious to know why those who do take offense to the presence of LGBT content, and I will say "LGBT", as its not a political term, its a community term and a descriptive, easy to type term, take such offense in the first place. Why is it so horrible to them that other people get to make choices that fit their definition of fun just like they get to do?
Some people are crazy homophobes sure, but I doubt most people really take offence at the LGBT content, its more of an issue where LGBT content is found in places where people's sexual orientation would not really be relevant and putting it in there for the sake of pointing out that characters are not heterosexual etc, feels a little forced.
Some people are crazy homophobes sure, but I doubt most people really take offence at the LGBT content, its more of an issue where LGBT content is found in places where people's sexual orientation would not really be relevant and putting it in there for the sake of pointing out that characters are not heterosexual etc, feels a little forced.
The thing is that you very rarely see this type of criticism levied towards heterosexual content.
There are many instances in which a fictional character's sexual orientation has no bearing on the story, merely serving as fluff - but it's only called shoehorning when it's LGBT content...
I think that's a double standard - but maybe I'm naïve to expect people wouldn't be so biased, considering the aforementioned majority of straight people "deciding" what goes, so to speak, in popular culture.
Having said that, I still think it's messed up.
Besides, we're never going to get to a point where LGBT content doesn't feel forced, if any attempts (outside of niche productions) to be so inclusive, will always be met with that kind of pushback.
It's never going to feel natural unless you let it happen naturally - which it very much is, currently, but people are making it weird, so at the same time it's not.
Catch-22. I'd rather we just let creators do whatever the fuck they want. That's what they did with Bloodlines, and what they're doing with Bloodlines 2.
...
At the end of the day, you can't please both the person living under a rock and the person straddled atop their high horse, so however the developers choose to approach any sensitive issue is really their prerogative...
Hell, arguably the best ending in the original Bloodlines (ignoring the Independent ending for the sake of the argument) has you aligning with the Anarchs, who are analogous to the real-life left wing, anyway. There's already a precedent, there, which the critics on STEAM and elsewhere are very conveniently forgetting. :justabite:
...
I am curious to know why those who do take offense to the presence of LGBT content, and I will say "LGBT", as its not a political term, its a community term and a descriptive, easy to type term, take such offense in the first place. Why is it so horrible to them that other people get to make choices that fit their definition of fun just like they get to do?
Some people are crazy homophobes sure, but I doubt most people really take offence at the LGBT content, its more of an issue where LGBT content is found in places where people's sexual orientation would not really be relevant and putting it in there for the sake of pointing out that characters are not heterosexual etc, feels a little forced.
Some people are crazy homophobes sure, but I doubt most people really take offence at the LGBT content, its more of an issue where LGBT content is found in places where people's sexual orientation would not really be relevant and putting it in there for the sake of pointing out that characters are not heterosexual etc, feels a little forced.
The thing is that you very rarely see this type of criticism levied towards heterosexual content.
There are many instances in which a fictional character's sexual orientation has no bearing on the story, merely serving as fluff - but it's only called shoehorning when it's LGBT content...
I think that's a double standard - but maybe I'm naïve to expect people wouldn't be so biased, considering the aforementioned majority of straight people "deciding" what goes, so to speak, in popular culture.
Having said that, I still think it's messed up.
Besides, we're never going to get to a point where LGBT content doesn't feel forced, if any attempts (outside of niche productions) to be so inclusive, will always be met with that kind of pushback.
It's never going to feel natural unless you let it happen naturally - which it very much is, currently, but people are making it weird, so at the same time it's not.
Catch-22. I'd rather we just let creators do whatever the fuck they want. That's what they did with Bloodlines, and what they're doing with Bloodlines 2.
There are not many games that do that, maybe TV and film sure, but games not really. Games like DragonAge or Mass Effect that are known for their pointless sexual content have the option of homosexual relationshops and sex.
In Games like the witcher it is optional but Geralt is written as a heterosexual character so there is no LGBT option aside from avoiding sex or avoiding the game altogether in protest.
aside from that I don't know many popular games with sexual content, maybe Metro but again its a case of a hero written as heterosexual and in Metro:exodus reproduction is something relevant to the motivation of the character so while it didn't need to have an implied sex scene it did need to have the heterosexual relationship.
I personally think V5 should have some LGBT content. There are obviously LGBT players playing VTM so it makes sense if they can find characters that they can better related to in that sense. but like I said, I'd avoid pointless sex or turn some people's favorite characters into LGBT(Iceman complex) when its very feasible to write in new characters, and the reason for that is precisely the reason for having LGBT characters.
...As promised, a more thorought reply about enforced (whatever)sexuality and other topics.
I wasn't really hoping for examples so the answer to your question about repeating yourself is no. I was hoping more for an explanation of the word itself. The word "enforced" brings to my mind images of police measures and disciplinary actions, so I was hoping more for clarification.
...
Funny, Nietzsche thought that God was dead. What a naive fool.And with strange aeons even death may die (c).
And with strange aeons even death may die (c).
The former god that gave birth to a human is deader than dead indeed.
What we're dealing with today is something begotten by a human who could not hold his shit together and could not face reality, the godless world. The realization that nothing is real was, apparently, to much to handle, so a human had fvcked himself, giving birth to a god-replica, a worse version of the former. The most probably, once more...
I once had someone on discord tell me that trans people shouldn't be sexualized. Excuse me, but if a trans person chooses to enter the adult entertainment industry, they have a right as any hetero person does, and I don't appreciate someone telling me I can't fap to Chanel Santini. She's a GODDESS imo, and her employment options shouldn't be repressed, especially by non trans people, like the person who said it.Your example is beyond misleading for the unfamiliar public, a transgender girl it's not, but what's called she-dude / shemale or ladyboy. Actual transgirls sell their family jewels, in some cases even before hormonal replacement. This is the reason they aren't popular in the industry at all, no substantial difference against non-trans ones, nothing exotic, you won't guess unless being told so.
Their power of rules might prove to be their undoing, this system was designed for Dark Ages, and it does not adapt to changes very well. It works while the situation is covered by a pre-developed protocol, but in modern world situations for which these are no protocols in Quaran have become more than possible.I once had someone on discord tell me that trans people shouldn't be sexualized. Excuse me, but if a trans person chooses to enter the adult entertainment industry, they have a right as any hetero person does, and I don't appreciate someone telling me I can't fap to Chanel Santini. She's a GODDESS imo, and her employment options shouldn't be repressed, especially by non trans people, like the person who said it.Your example is beyond misleading for the unfamiliar public, a transgender girl it's not, but what's called she-dude / shemale or ladyboy. Actual transgirls sell their family jewels, in some cases even before hormonal replacement. This is the reason they aren't popular in the industry at all, no substantial difference against non-trans ones, nothing exotic, you won't guess unless being told so.
As promised, a more thorought reply about enforced (whatever)sexuality and other topics.
For the first, there's no such thing as "enforced heterosexuality / heterosexuality that being shoved in your face", no matter how badly some SJWs want to believe so
for the reason it being not only a biological default, but only one orientation that exists in the biological sense.
It's improssible to enforce something that hardwided already. From the same point of view, alternatives are but personal preferences that has little to do with it. There are, probably, some genetic or hormonal factors that could make one more prone to switching the side of street, but nothing determinal. Not to say, these theories tend to be pretty weak.
Due to "alternative orientations" being not a biological, but personal / social phenomenon, one cannot simply slap this label on a character without any background or further explanation, so unlike a hetero one, who could be a hetero for no other reason that being a human, by the virtue of biology.
This kind absolutely should be properly introduced and dedicated some devs' time to in order to be an actual personality (personal and social phenomenon, remember?), not a yet another forced
This not only makes very little sense in games where developed pesonalities and romance aren't intergal parts of, and also means these characters would receive far more screen time in these than straight if done. So, not every kind of game fits for this.
Now, sexuality without a prefix is a completely different talk. There's so many games where this is done so sloppily, they would be better off without anything sexual at all, so that part would be left completely at the discretion of player's imagination. Coupled with pointlessly sexed-up characters, it's a trve gamedev cancer, which I detest so greatly. Now add the recent trend of pandering to minorities in the mix... You've guessed it. This is an actual crux of the problem, the lack of sexually neutral games and an unhealthy fixation on sex as a whole, not alternative.
This time would be better invested in anything else. It's not all about sex, you know.I agree that its not all about sex.
When it comes to weaponizing the topics, people pushing for more equal opportunities for LGBTQ people are often labelled SJW, regardless of their intensity in the debate. It doesn't aid in forming consensus by calling someone a SJW, it' mostly used to stop a debate and tell someone you aren't listening to their point of view.
so unlike other letters in LGBT, they demand no special treatment aka "state of exception", want to be accepted into an existing crowd, not create a new one.
Actually, I did not imply that you're a SJW, and if you're picking on words choice and into semantics that much, why you've so conviniently forgotten that I've added "some"? Congrats, from now you've began to sound exactly like a "SJW stereotype"... and someone else as well, complete with my post torn apart to quotes. There was no need, it wasn't that big. Certainly it wasn't intentional, but still looks so. Likewise no need to repeat how much you respect me while forcing me to make my way through my own quotes from previous message phrase by phrase, at the same time. Like I have a memory problem or so. We're talking basic forum ethics here, and if you say the "respect" word that often, for the first and foremost, show me some actual respect, dude, thank you sincerely.
"The" word issue. Nothing but word games again.
To cut it short, there is no such a thing as biological homosexuality. One cannot be born like that, only become by choice. Therefore, a character does not need no reason, nor explanation, nor background for being heterosexual, but not vice versa. What's so hard to get?
As for the rest, it's ridiculous, it doesn't seem like you have a problem understanding what you like. That misunderstanding is suspiciously selective, looks more like an excuse to quote my words and twist them around. I'm sure that you did not mean it, but I don't need nor a translator nor an interpreter. In my humble opinion, other readers also, so would you mind leaving my words alone? Thanks in advance.
P.S. To Signothorn, what I've meant, a ton of people who aren't educated on the topic are reading this and might get you wrong.
The kinda guy that would steal your castImagine this part sang from the point view of a gay, it falls right into the place.
And buy a burning house
Then call you up and invite you in
And jerk you off with a sandpaper hand
Is there really a significant difference between "rooted in" or "determined"?Haha, "deeply rooted in", more precisely. So emotional. Nice try in pandering, but no hat. You're selling your opinion for an immutable fact. Apparently, the scientific community is anything but undivided upon it. Yep, I heard about this noise with what was dubbed "gay gene" by journalists who are into pop genetics.
About the choice... I got what you mean, to me it sounds like your personality was shaped by outside circumstances, a combination of personal traits and life experience. Probably, some non-determinal biological / genetic factors contributed and aggraviated the effect as well. Make no mistake, not by biology, by the society (in the broad sense), in a word. Yet there's always a choice to follow the society's lead, to embrace or to defy it. Not that I condone anyone for any choice about this.
This is the paradox of society. It first influences and shapes us in the most wild and unpredictable ways, then it's the first to complain that we came out wrong, not unlike a certain kind of parents.
This is why history and background are so important for this kind of character: devs need to show how exactly his personalty was shaped and why he ended up like this, otherwise it will feel unconvincing and forced. Pandering, to put in differently.
In this light, "heterosexuality by choice" is a kind of double flip. Initial biological blank state (hetero) -> homosexuality (as a result of society's influence) -> hetero (by a deliberate choice).
Conversely, in my case it's not such a deliberate choice, but a simple acknowledgement of a said initial state. I see no gain for me in trying anything, ehm, funny, quite the contrary, that's all.
I do not claim to be a master on the subject you two are debating. As I said before, I read a few scientific studies over the years but that is all. However, all of them agreed that homosexuality itself is entirely rooted in biology.
Is there really a significant difference between "rooted in" or "determined"?Haha, "deeply rooted in", more precisely. So emotional. Nice try in pandering, but no hat. You're selling your opinion for an immutable fact. Apparently, the scientific community is anything but undivided upon it. Yep, I heard about this noise with what was dubbed "gay gene" by journalists who are into pop genetics.
Even without getting into the science, in not unusual that twins are anything but like each other save the appearance, which would not be the case should we were determined by genetics.
Could I ask you something as well? You ask questions and make nitpicky demands to substantiate a point of view, you want information, a ton of, but share almost nothing in return. I won't be the one to complain about an informational parasite on a vampire forum, and I'm, unlike you, not greedy, I did not mind at all, but this got old. Would you be so nice to stop creeping me around and get lost at last? Thanks in advance, sir.
This topic for sure degenerated more quickly than the disco becoming a joke
The topic was better when we were sharing ideas instead of insisting the other parties agree with our views. We're from different places, with different backgrounds and life experiences, nobody is expected to agree on everything. I've enjoyed reading the thread, just don't let it turn personal when someone challenges our realities. If it gets too heated, maybe step away from the thread for a day lol. Nobody is going to solve a major social issue in society in the PlanetVampire Off Topic area, so let's not take things so seriously that it goes to a place that makes me want to lock the thread.
If one day they were to come up with indisputable proof that homosexuality and bisexuality were purely biological, would that somehow have a negative impact on your life and existence? Would that really ruin your day? Because it seems to me that its very important to you to believe that homosexuality is in some way unnatural. You seem VERY invested in this viewpoint. Why do you even care so much?If such a viewpoint will ever become accepted, it will mean disasterous, and dystopian in perspective consequences upon mankind. For the first, it would mean that we don't have any control over who we are, so trying to change anything is pointless. Not only gayness/non-gayness question, but which exactly kind of either one really wants to be. That any other personal traits that similarly contributed by genetic factors (and there is a ton of them, nearly everything about personality has these factors to some extent) are predetermined as well. It will result in a very passive stance on life, which will make people even more prone to mass manipulation than before. The society will have a permanent Catholic indulgence to do anything with us, it will be never to blame. But this is only a beginning...
If such a viewpoint will ever become accepted, it will mean disasterous, and dystopian in perspective consequences upon mankind. For the first, it would mean that we don't have any control over who we are, so trying to change anything is pointless. Not only gayness/non-gayness question, but which exactly kind of either one really wants to be. That any other personal traits that similarly contributed by genetic factors (and there is a ton of them, nearly everything about personality has these factors to some extent) are predetermined as well. It will result in a very passive stance on life, which will make people even more prone to mass manipulation than before. The society will have a permanent Catholic indulgence to do anything with us, it will be never to blame. But this is only a beginning...
It would mean genetic witch hunts and genetic fixes for all sorts of undesirable traits in perspective, by which the mankind will screw itself even more, because by the nature of genetics, very roughly, one bit of information encodes not one trait, but multiple and otherwise unrelated (otherwise encoding something as diverse as a human would require orders of magnitude more capacity than DNA provides), the same information that encode apparent quirks and disorders also may encode useful survival traits, not to say, even "undesirable" traits aren't necessary useless.
On the other hand, if genetics would be considered only one of the factors (genetic, biological, social and personal), it means that it pointless to blame people for who they are or "being to weak to overcome x", but also that we could choose how we use what we have and make the best of it.
About depiciton of different people in videogames, especially those who generally considered more quirky than average, in a way we all just this way, and that is that. At the same time, we are results of a former life experience unfolded and look rather flat without this context, more for the public that does not share the same. It's hard to put in a word, "reasons for x" isn't an accurate or even correct way to put it indeed.
As for Aurelian, I didn't mind it back then, because these questions at least provided a device for idea development. Right question is still an information. Not so for a titbit with an aim to present someone as incompetent or hypocritical, like this certain one.
I still don't get why many people hate having LGBT content in video games in general. lolApparently, because genetics turned up to be more fascinating topic. Just kidding.
Exactly, because there is no need to declare something strictly genetical / biological in order to be considered natural. Even if it is the one of factors, not the only, it is. Don't make a mistake, in broader meaning, not "fully predetermined". It could be said, less natural than usual, although, "natural" is such an awkward word that open to any interpretation, the difference between natural and artificial is mostly a convention, so I would prefer to avoid it altogether. Any factor that beyond our control is absolutely enough.
Therefore, these attempts to prove the strictly genetical nature aren't only an overkill, this could ultimately result in damage, if not to the movement in question, to adjacent areas. Even this article on wikipedia is unsetting enough to read since the focus of researches seems to be shifting to so-called mental disorders from the initial topic.
I'm also glad, despite it being more like a confrontation at times. It was worth clarifying some of my misconceptions, a more accurate picture of what's going on wouldn't hurt for sure.
I still don't get why many people hate having LGBT content in video games in general. lolApparently, because genetics turned up to be more fascinating topic. Just kidding.
Ironically, it's easier for non-hetero players to relate to hetero character than otherwise (or, at least, accept).
It's certainly a faulty practice to determine what's acceptable in the society through "naturalness" in any sense, which is another reason this trend sets me off that much.
As for the presence in games, I believe I've came up with a better way to vebalise what I was thinking. The farther the character is from an average audience of a game, or the more unusual, the more effort it takes to depict such in way that will make sense for everyone. If an element is familiar, nothing but a simple statement of fact is required, everyone will be able to relate from their own life experience. The same cannot be said about elements unfamiliar, not to say potentially off-putting. For an unfamilar audience, the same will require an extra to make it seem like an integral part of character, otherwise will appear slapped on. Not explanation or reason, but something that will create a feeling of that "life experience" behind so it's not here only because devs wanted. Ironically, it's easier for non-hetero players to relate to hetero character than otherwise (or, at least, accept).
In more mass-produced genres, like Japanese Visual Novels, it's resolved by a set of genres, so if it doesn't say, for example, "yaoi" on the tin, one won't unexpectedly come across it. Different audiences simply have different games. The same is impossible with normal games, everything's in the same box, the cast should appeal to the whole audience, at least not put off a part, which requires a discretion, at minimum, to handle right.
By the way, in the example I was initially going to provide, the character from DA2, ironically, looked like pandering / being slapped a label on to me despite having a reason and excuse, while the one from DA1 did not. DA2 also certainly lacks discretion on this matter, to the point of the troll-ish joke.
Ironically, it's easier for non-hetero players to relate to hetero character than otherwise (or, at least, accept).
Really, I'm heterosexual and even I can see that they don't have much choice that way.
I think all that could be said on this topic was said already.
Should you care to read to the end, there are genres where they are, and selection isn't lacking by any means. Still, tend to be less picky.
Otherwise, everything was said indeed.
Should you care to read to the end, there are genres where they are, and selection isn't lacking by any means.
Very likely I overestimate this factor for sure, since the authors would have a hard time setting me off with anything but a crappy scenario and irritating gameplay. So, when something receives a ton of complaints, I might very well misinterpret an actual reason and assume it's all about quality of writing (if myself found it lacking) or unaccustomed public, and for another reason, post-USSR countries are far more conservative in this respect than Western, even today (DA1 was received extremely well despite this, btw), when in truth someone just needed a target to lynch.
I was into BioWare until DA2/ME3 hit the shelves. They were known for anything but pointless sex scenes / melodrama back then, even outfits were tamer than an average RPG. So I can even top this gamer you mentioned: intentionally created a female mage character in DA1 only in order to make Zevran's first assasination story sound more depraved, and then laughed like a hell from the scene, I think I even mentioned it somewhere on this forum.
As for the focus on women audience and seriousness, a fair share of mainstream Western stuff qualifies as well, so this was said mostly on methods to deal with potentially objectionable content, if we're talking mainstream.
To be fair, in every genre or topic, the bulk is, well, the bulk. A few RPGs actually worth something, and so on...
Thanks, that's an interesting reading you've provided, to me at least.
You'd be surprised how many times things are well received despite poor writing. For example Love Death+Robots got 8.8 on IMDB probably for SFX since the writing is quite poor.Considering that the audience in question were mostly jaded Russian classic RPG fans who broke more than one lance over Fallout 3, I believe it was representative. The nearly unanimous consensus was: a classic RPG by no means, still a worthy successor to them, could be recommended to everyone. Very few got rid of Zevran in one or two playthroughs, for roleplay reasons (distrust), but I have yet to hear about a single real dedicated Zevran hater (save blatant trolls) from Russain RPG forums, and no clashes over "tolerance". That's to say, Russian public is notoriously homophobic, so I consider it a really good writing if such a character was well-received.
Speaking of outfits, these games (BioWare and Obsidian) were once jokingly labelled Taliban RPGs. Still, these reasonably realistic models provided a background for more flashy, like Aribeth's armor, to shine. Nevertheless, her armor still looks like an armor, one could consider it a dress armor for parades and such, an acceptable break from realism.
Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?
Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?
Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?
Realism can be boring, in my book...Indeed, so I usually use it in an another sense - a logically cohesive plot without holes and pianos in bushes. Not this time, though.
We did not chose to be human, we did not chose to be born like we are, moreso, we did not chose to be born to begin with.
Sometimes, I get a feeling that someone unborn (like, who I was supposed to be in the first place) tries to talk or act through me. And when it hits, I'm nearly always trying not to hold back that little red-eyed unborn lord (c).
Not that I believe in supernatural, I think it's only one of signs that I'm about to do something that I really want to.
Realism can be boring, in my book...Indeed, so I usually use it in an another sense - a logically cohesive plot without holes and pianos in bushes. Not this time, though.
Still, these games provided a nice break from usual sword-n-sorcery style. Armor that looks like a reasonable armor. My only complain to DA1 was the lack of alternative outfits for a mage. The same is true, or, at least was true at the time.
The same goes for ME/ME2. In ME2, only Miranda's outfit was a blatant fanservice. It backfired, many did not take seriously one of the best-written characters by BioWare, exact;y due to damn catsuit.
They wouldn't be much a problem if not the suit.
Besides the catsuit, the only other moment in ME2 that qualifies is a fanservice joke, in a dialogue between TIM and female Shepard:
> I noticed a few... upgrades. Hope you didn't replace anything really important?
Since I did not notice any significant changes from ME1, the line cracked me up. TIM is a type of character from whom you could expect a control chip implant, not something entirely different.
Writing certainly won't stave off a lynch mob, but still, it can win some support among people who aren't into lynching, should the issue arise. For example, I wouldn't consider even a part of those #gamegators genuniely disappointed gamers should DA2/ME3 writing been as good as DA1.
Just to bring the conversation mildly back on topic, I do know that a teeny tiny number of players were annoyed when Kaiden Alenko was revealed to be bisexual. But it wasn't a very significant number of people. Their claimed issue with it was taking an "established" straight character and "suddenly" making him bisexual to "pander" to LGBT people. Such people seem confused with how bisexuality works. A) neither previous game ever stated that Kaidan was heterosexual, they simply don't explicitly show it in the final product and B) he was always intended to be bisexual from the start anyway, nearly ALL of his male romance content is present but hidden in the first game's files and there is a mod that easily unlocks it, including a complete set of audio files for a same sex relationship with him. They "cut" that content (really they just hid it) from the first game (and mentions of Thane being bi from the second game) out of fear of homophobic backlash at the times those games were released. So what it really is an example of, is an LGBT character being sort of (but not explicitly) "straight washed" to pander to homphobes and I am very glad they made moves to fix that in part 3.
Just to bring the conversation mildly back on topic, I do know that a teeny tiny number of players were annoyed when Kaiden Alenko was revealed to be bisexual. But it wasn't a very significant number of people. Their claimed issue with it was taking an "established" straight character and "suddenly" making him bisexual to "pander" to LGBT people. Such people seem confused with how bisexuality works. A) neither previous game ever stated that Kaidan was heterosexual, they simply don't explicitly show it in the final product and B) he was always intended to be bisexual from the start anyway, nearly ALL of his male romance content is present but hidden in the first game's files and there is a mod that easily unlocks it, including a complete set of audio files for a same sex relationship with him. They "cut" that content (really they just hid it) from the first game (and mentions of Thane being bi from the second game) out of fear of homophobic backlash at the times those games were released. So what it really is an example of, is an LGBT character being sort of (but not explicitly) "straight washed" to pander to homphobes and I am very glad they made moves to fix that in part 3.
Bisexuality is often such an iffy thing in games, movies, fiction in general...it's rare to see it portrayed thoughtfully, even rarer to see a good portrayal of a male bisexual character. On the one hand, too often it's introduced as an "edgy" trait for evil (female) characters, or in order to sex up a female character (Bloodlines itself is guilty of this), which isn't done for the benefit of LGBT people, but rather because it's a straight guy fantasy.
On the other hand, there are people who seem to think that bisexual people should date both/more than one gender at all times, and if they do not they are either perceived as straight or gay. This is true of real life as well, speaking from experience.
Coming back to games, there are also some where everyone is bisexual, but not because it's intended to be their identity, but as a 'catch-all' setting to allow people to romance whoever they want without restrictions. In fact, that isn't bisexuality anymore but a "blank state sexuality" for the player to project their own onto. In a way I can see the benefit in this, but personally I prefer it when characters have individual preferences, be they straight or gay or bi. In Fallout New Vegas for example, you couldn't flirt with Arcade as a female and Veronica responded differently to you if you were a guy. Granted, you couldn't really romance anyone there, but they do make their preferences known and the player cannot change them. It makes for more interesting characters, makes them feel more like actual people.
But certainly discussed throughout 16 pages of back and forth!!!!!
But again, as interesting as that is, I would rather have the "PC Sexual" version than nothing at all. While its more interesting to have it be an integral part of their identity, I think abandoning it all together in favor of heteronormacy rather than make a less interesting bisexual character is an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater or cutting your nose off to spite your face.
The above being said, a character not stating "this is just so very integral to my identity, I am ever so bi" doesn't mean that it isn't integral to their identity, it could mean that they don't feel the need to talk about it because to them it doesn't need discussion or justification. Its just a part of who they are and it doesn't need to be gabbed about, in their eyes.
There are those who don't want PC sexual bisexuals at all, they consider it "lazy" or "cheap" to do that that, but bisexual erasure is a problem in real life, even within the LGBT community and I don't think we need to further that in video games even if the bisexual is perceived as "PC Sexual".
Ashley was also supposed to be romanced by both femshep and broshep, but was cut from ME1. I usually play as femshep because I feel the renegade lines are delivered better, especially "big stupid jellyfish". I understand why they may have cut Ashley's romance with femshep because of Ashley's religious views, but wish it was an option nevertheless.
But again, as interesting as that is, I would rather have the "PC Sexual" version than nothing at all. While its more interesting to have it be an integral part of their identity, I think abandoning it all together in favor of heteronormacy rather than make a less interesting bisexual character is an example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater or cutting your nose off to spite your face.
The above being said, a character not stating "this is just so very integral to my identity, I am ever so bi" doesn't mean that it isn't integral to their identity, it could mean that they don't feel the need to talk about it because to them it doesn't need discussion or justification. Its just a part of who they are and it doesn't need to be gabbed about, in their eyes.
There are those who don't want PC sexual bisexuals at all, they consider it "lazy" or "cheap" to do that that, but bisexual erasure is a problem in real life, even within the LGBT community and I don't think we need to further that in video games even if the bisexual is perceived as "PC Sexual".
To be honest, I find that PC sexual bisexual characters actually contribute to bi erasure, because those characters aren't really perceived as being genuinely bi, they're perceived by each player in turn as being whatever they want them to be. To give an example, SWTOR (Star Wars the Old Republic): originally, all of the characters were straight-romance only, then later on they added PC sexual bi characters and more recently they announced they would update the original characters to be romanceable by both genders as well. Reading people's reactions, I've seen stuff along the lines of: "Ah finally I can make Jaesa a lesbian!" and "Hmm, my male Jedi Knight is going to get quite a shock when he finds out his wife is bi..." So those people already had their own established vision of those characters and their orientations, or saw this as an opportunity to mold them to better fit their headcanon. In either case, it wasn't bisexuality.
This is the reason why I said I find that bisexuality as a true and meaningful identity is lacking in games, whether the character in question is open about it or more private, because I didn't mean to imply that they should all constantly talk about how bi they are, that's another harmful trope. (I haven't played Dragon Age so I cannot comment on that.)
That being said, I do agree with you that it's better than having no LGBT options at all, and this at least gives people the freedom to roleplay it however they want, which is a good thing. I was just making a point that it takes away from the characters themselves and, as far as I'm concerned, doesn't help portray bisexuality as a legitimate identity.
I think for most people disappointed with ME3 it was the endings. I know that was my issue when I first played the game in 2012 when it was brand new. That was probably the most shocking, horrible ending experience I have ever had with any game in my life. I kept telling myself "I have GOT to be dreaming this" and I didn't mean my Shepard, I meant my real self. LOL Most people that I know of praise the majority of the rest of the game. Speaking of fanservice I think the Citadel DLC was major fan service and I loved it. I always use mods to make the party at the end my actual game end, that combined with the "Happy Ending Mod". lol I was more OK with the endings after the Extended Cut DLC but I still prefer the Happy Ending Mod. In my head canon, that is THE ending, and the fact that the next sequel took place far into the future in another galaxy entirely makes it easy for me to keep it that way as nothing in MEA contradicts my headTroll endings are only a tip of the iceberg. The writing went downhill after ME2, the main plot is lazy and full of holes, many characters not behave like themselves, as if an infamous Domi usurped writer's mantle from the actual team. It's totally like today Hollywood movies with a focus on so-called emotional scenes and melodrama, apparently the public so fond of them that does not notice how messy, far-fetched or even blatantly illogical these plots are. Romances has become the main attraction (or distraction?).
canon.
Without reading too much of what is discussed in this thread, the question is: if someone get's embraced, does it violate their safe space?
I don't care what or who is included in the game as long as I am allowed to treat them the way I wish and come to my own conclusions about them.
This thread reminds me of a shitty article I attempted to write a couple of months ago and it seems relevant atm and encapsulates my feelings on the matter
http://indiegamer.info/blog/2018/11/18/are-games-political-and-should-they-be/
To me, marriage itself is an institution that hardly makes any sense these days. To spend efforts trying to reform something that long became so outdated it could be for practical purposes considered fictitious, makes even less sense.
Well thank you, Dark Zephyr I appreciate the kind words!
The problem with marriage is that it is a religious ceremony with certain requirements that are demanded by the faith in question, with not being homosexual being one of them.
But marriage is also a contract that gives benefits to couples who wish to live together provided by the state and the state should not discriminate or refuse an option to citizen based on sexual orientation. It seems all problems would be resolved if they simply renamed the official state contract between partners as something other than marriage thus completely distancing itself from the religious aspect.
3. Same sex couples did try the "other name" thing at one point.I believe he meant marriage itself should be officially dismantled worldwide and renamed into something else that will carry its benefits in a respective country or state.
3. Same sex couples did try the "other name" thing at one point.I believe he meant marriage itself should be officially dismantled worldwide and renamed into something else that will carry its benefits in a respective country or state.
Interesting info, I see that marriage in USA isn't unlike medical insurance. In that case it makes a lot of sense indeed. Living in the country without both is such a mixed blessing, we already have the most of the these so-called benefits (or, rather, the lack of handicaps for unmarried). Cheers from Ukraine.
You won't believe, at one point I considered emigration to USA as the one of options, but quickly scrapped the idea once learnt of taxes that impossible to avoid, mortgages, medical insurance, 10000x inflated prices on pharms and so on... In USSR, those who don't work, don't eat (c), an infamous anti-parasite law, in USA don't receive medical aid, apparently. Was more than surprised that an average American had less actual money on hands than me back then, in relatively merry 2000's. Even now I could've used the surrounding chaos to my benefits if managed to sort my health problems (ironically enough, not drug-related) out.
Dismantlement would solve the problem with "traditional values" crowd as well, because marriage that bears quite a some cultural baggage would become a purely informal institution distanced from official partnership/union/etc, so no one would be stepping on each other's toes.
Marriage can be a great thing, and can help keep family structures in place. However, I think it's a little too easy to divorce, or break the commitment of "till death do we part", so it has become rather meaningless. I think anyone should be able to marry anyone else as long as they aren't directly related or under age. Coming from a broken home life growing up like many of us, I'd say a loving gay couple is far better than a group home or worse places I experienced. It's hard enough to be a single parent, adding prejudice against their sexual preference can also cause unnecessary cultural isolation that leads to a bad home life. I can respect people having a religious view that marriage should be only between a man or a woman, but I think most hide behind their bible to justify their prejudices. If they don't understand something, it's blasphemous, and they have some bible passage that supposedly back up their claim. Many people here probably have people like this in their family.
"Ezekiel 23:20 "There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses." The bible can be interpreted in many ways, even an erotic novel. If someone simply tells me some Westboro Baptist Church talking points, I can't take it seriously. If someone isn't harming anyone else in a provable way, they should be treated equally. Even if they see people who are homosexual as being flawed in some way, I don't agree with it, but they shouldn't act like they're perfect either. as I'm typing this, I'm thinking of one of my cousins who is very biblical when it comes to anything she morally disagrees with. Then she wonders why her gay or bi daughter has run away several times, and why her family life is so screwed up.
I'm dead tired from work, I hope this is somewhat intelligible. Sorry for the rant, but I felt provoked by the subject for whatever reason.
I think anyone should be able to marry anyone else as long as they aren't directly related...
even random people could be related closely than initially appears, and no one is safe from bumping into an unknown half-sibling or two.
Is the "Law" a dump stat for Torries so they think that "Criminal Code" is a porn movie title?
My guess if such a movie exists indeed it's a gay/BDSM porn.
(Dropping in the argument after leaving for a while and hoping to not write about stuff already discussed....)
One thing I hate is when big entertainment corps create and (heavily) advertise a LGBT character which his/her sexual orientation aren't relevant or necessary to the plot. I hate it for some reasons:
- it's an exploitation of the emancipation of the LGBT community
- puts limits to the plot before the necessity of knowing how to develop the character comes
- the pointlessness of specifing things and putting borders to the process of knowing the character
- the actual fact of point out a P.C. aspect out of the blue which only can give reasons to gamegaters/anti-LGBT/assorted bigots to whine about the myth of the homosexual agenda and raise recognition. While it could have been avoided (other than help the LGBT people recognition) to leave these aspect not defined, express them when the right moment comes, after the character is more known and familiarized, and not making big announcements. To make it feel as a natural thing as it should be. Then only the more extremist haters will hate them while more people received better there characters and avoid these morons.
Also true (but only for the advertisement aspects) on non white male characters
My guess if such a movie exists indeed it's a gay/BDSM porn.
Now now, I *do not* watch straight porn and even I know one of the most popular STRAIGHT porn series franchises of all time is "Taboo", a series of films about incest between mothers and sons, fathers and daughters, brothers and sisters, uncles and nieces, etc. There is NO long running movie series like that in gay porn. Sure, every now and again a movie might feature that type of storyline but you can find that in all porn orientation genres to some degree, really. But we gays do NOT have a wildly popular dedicated series like that that spans 23 films and 3 decades. JUST for the record. lol
I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda.
I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda. But it's clear that there were no agendas save her trying to sell her stuff and failing miserably in doing so. Even myself, as underinformed as I was, would have done a better job. That raises a question, why she (and not me, for example) wears a professional writer's mantle and gets paid in the first place. Won't raise a finger for such a person, no matter the actual reasons of attackers, like "to hell with that, you're on your own, this is survival of the fittest".
For the joy of bible belt rednecks I suppose
I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda.
Tecnically exists a gay agenda. Is called 14th emendament. (cit.)
For the joy of bible belt rednecks I suppose
That would make sense lol
I should also note that due to authors like Amber Scott myself nearly bought the aforementioned myth about LGBT agenda.
Tecnically exists a gay agenda. Is called 14th emendament. (cit.)
There's also this!!! Aaaargh!!!!
(https://pics.me.me/coming-soon-the-gay-agenda-they-worked-at-their-jobs-5044849.png)
"We wanted to safe humanity, we tried it all to warn the world on the menace of gays: perverts, pedophiles, freaks. But, despite our efforts, they managed to show the world how they are absolutely not like us."
I? A fiend? I am a soldier of our planet!
Or also supporters of Trump, a supporter, among other things, of incest (even if in a foreseeable rapish enactment)Ha, wasn't aware of this, so it seems that one topic on which we aren't disagree upon has been finally unearthed. Apparently, the only other is hormonal treatment for scalp hair loss. Such an irony, Finasteride, a testosterone antagonist he was using, is an old-school pharm, effective, has minimal side effects (save libido loss) and dirt cheap... Everywhere but in USA.
I don't think I have ever heard of Amber Scott, what does she write and talk about regarding LGBT themes?Did a horrible attempt in transgender fan (dis)service aka Mizhena that I've mentioned earlier, which, in conjunction with her threats to bring "diversity" into character writing, set off not only gamegaters and such, but the supossed target audience that wasn't amused either.
And me of that film:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46813782795_cde265cabe.jpg) (https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/46813782795_8175162c3b_o.jpg)Quote from: ErosI? A fiend? I am a soldier of our planet!Or also supporters of Trump, a supporter, among other things, of incest (even if in a foreseeable rapish enactment)Ha, wasn't aware of this, so it seems that one topic on which we aren't disagree upon has been finally unearthed. Apparently, the only other is hormonal treatment for scalp hair loss. Such an irony, Finasteride, a testosterone antagonist he was using, is an old-school pharm, effective, has minimal side effects (save libido loss) and dirt cheap... Everywhere but in USA.I don't think I have ever heard of Amber Scott, what does she write and talk about regarding LGBT themes?Did a horrible attempt in transgender fan (dis)service aka Mizhena that I've mentioned earlier, which, in conjunction with her threats to bring "diversity" into character writing, set off not only gamegaters and such, but the supossed target audience that wasn't amused either.
Opposite examples also exist, like Catherine videogame that invoked the wrath of (presumed) LGBT lynch mob due to political incorrectness. They totally missed the context, in comparison with others, the character in question, Erika, is downright flattening. Yeah, the only woman from the cast who isn't a murderous yandere, murderous traditional values control freak, bitchy, unfaithful or screwed up in some other way is a trans-woman. So, despite that she had "forgotten" to mention this fact, because of the environment being mildly transphobic, the protagonist included, Toby (by the way, the only male character who isn't equally fvcked up) isn't one to complain since he won the first prize he had been looking for.
I'm not sure if these people lack the sense of humor so badly that got offended by a weird Japanese trash horror/comedy videogame, or only pretended so in order to gain some extra blog hits.
I bet those mages, having such a huge knowledge and intelligence, would't even know concepts of bi, gay, etero and whatever else :P
I? A fiend? I am a soldier of my [own] planet!Which is an epitome of Tzimisce.
That quote above is one of my favorites because in Russian it also has a second meaning:QuoteI? A fiend? I am a soldier of my [own] planet!Which is an epitome of Tzimisce.
As for Tremere and Goratrix, sure, this counts as an ok fanservice unlike fan disservice such as Sasha Vykos or Zachary Sikorsky. What's the most funny, the latter could pass should he been picked up by a regular Sabbat pack for his skills (not by LGBT pack for being LGBT), which would imply that the Sabbat don't care about this sort of thing.
To continue on LGBT trends that could contribute to a negative impression, I would also name historical figures / famous people exploitation, the practice into fitting corpses into respective stereotypes, while they did not share the same moral or ethical values, (mis)attributed to them, with members. The most glaring examples is protrayal of Oscar Wilde neraly as a modern LGBT activist, while actually he was his own type of weird, one of the kind, or fresh Antisex movement that recently claimed H. P. Lovecraft into its ranks...
Unfortunately, this happens without any intent to judge if you don't already have a strong opinion on the topic, on subconscious level if you like. In the same way these witch hunters subtly skew LGBT people opinion. If you did not play Catherine yourself, or watch lets plays, or read wiki, an encounter with such an info will undoubtely skew your impression of it. Complainers voices are always the loudest, those who are vocal about it eiter bashed it or found it problematic (a dog whistle word as Americans say). I'm sure there are much more LGBT people who did not see any problem with it, but this requires some effort to imagine, since they've remained silent.
As critical to this sort of thing as I am, I did not entirely avoid this pitfall as well, even if made the right conclusions at large.
People also spend so much time calling names and attaching labels that no time is left to check if they actually fit. I was being called child-free, asexual, antisex, and recently learnt of a new stuff, anti-natalism, guess how... Even if I share an idea or two with these, only somewhat and only on the surface.
Opposite examples also exist, like Catherine videogame that invoked the wrath of (presumed) LGBT lynch mob due to political incorrectness. They totally missed the context, in comparison with others, the character in question, Erika, is downright flattening. Yeah, the only woman from the cast who isn't a murderous yandere, murderous traditional values control freak, bitchy, unfaithful or screwed up in some other way is a trans-woman. So, despite that she had "forgotten" to mention this fact, because of the environment being mildly transphobic, the protagonist included, Toby (by the way, the only male character who isn't equally fvcked up) isn't one to complain since he won the first prize he had been looking for.
I'm not sure if these people lack the sense of humor so badly that got offended by a weird Japanese trash horror/comedy videogame, or only pretended so in order to gain some extra blog hits.
UPD: to clear it up, it's not a visual novel / date sim, but a puzzle game (as hardcore as nails mixed with broken glass) that includes romance content. And it isn't erotic either, despite the deliberately misleading cover art, unless you count the stuff like a pregnancy scam as such.
Should add that Catherine game pissed off not only LGBT activists, but feminists as well, they also conviniently overlooked the fact that the men are more than are match to these women, and on top of that, gods are complete jackasses. If anything, it's misanthropic, not misogynistic.To sum it up, LGBT witch hunters did not like that Erika held off that fact about herself from a guy, feminist witch hunters that women here are MEAN, both took this out of context. The game became scandalous because of that.
Opposite examples also exist, like Catherine videogame that invoked the wrath of (presumed) LGBT lynch mob due to political incorrectness. They totally missed the context, in comparison with others, the character in question, Erika, is downright flattening. Yeah, the only woman from the cast who isn't a murderous yandere, murderous traditional values control freak, bitchy, unfaithful or screwed up in some other way is a trans-woman. So, despite that she had "forgotten" to mention this fact, because of the environment being mildly transphobic, the protagonist included, Toby (by the way, the only male character who isn't equally fvcked up) isn't one to complain since he won the first prize he had been looking for.
I'm not sure if these people lack the sense of humor so badly that got offended by a weird Japanese trash horror/comedy videogame, or only pretended so in order to gain some extra blog hits.
UPD: to clear it up, it's not a visual novel / date sim, but a puzzle game (as hardcore as nails mixed with broken glass) that includes romance content. And it isn't erotic either, despite the deliberately misleading cover art, unless you count the stuff like a pregnancy scam as such.Should add that Catherine game pissed off not only LGBT activists, but feminists as well, they also conviniently overlooked the fact that the men are more than are match to these women, and on top of that, gods are complete jackasses. If anything, it's misanthropic, not misogynistic.To sum it up, LGBT witch hunters did not like that Erika held off that fact about herself from a guy, feminist witch hunters that women here are MEAN, both took this out of context. The game became scandalous because of that.
I think that "political correctness" trend is the main culprit here, it sets people apart by making them see offences that arent here.
Which is extra hilarious because actual neo-Nazi with realistic goals arent concerned with sexual minorities simply because they're minority that aren't pack enough power nor has any intention to actually rock the boat. Immigrants, especially from certain countries, on the other hand...
I went to their awful website just once and I will never repeat that mistake again. Blech. But it appeared to me that there was even a point in the game where you can re-enact the Orlando Florida Pulse Nightclub Massacre of 2016. So yeah, I totally understand people getting worked up about THOSE games.
But anger over games like the one you described, they need to let it go.
What about a game like Postal 2? Could or should it be made today? I don't take it seriously and find it hilarious to piss on people to blow off stress. I also like pissing on Gary Coleman and Osama Bin Laden types in the game. Using a cat as a shotgun silencer is also pure genius imho. Where exactly is the line between dark humor that not everyone gets and something that is too insensitive? Dark humor isn't for everyone, but does it need to be?
I went to their awful website just once and I will never repeat that mistake again. Blech. But it appeared to me that there was even a point in the game where you can re-enact the Orlando Florida Pulse Nightclub Massacre of 2016. So yeah, I totally understand people getting worked up about THOSE games.
But anger over games like the one you described, they need to let it go.
I don't know about wether we should "let go" of some of these things. I'm neither gay nor jewish but I honestly cannot stand for trash like this having the title of videogame, it dishonors the genre and hurts people in more ways than one.
What about a game like Postal 2? Could or should it be made today? I don't take it seriously and find it hilarious to piss on people to blow off stress. I also like pissing on Gary Coleman and Osama Bin Laden types in the game. Using a cat as a shotgun silencer is also pure genius imho. Where exactly is the line between dark humor that not everyone gets and something that is too insensitive? Dark humor isn't for everyone, but does it need to be?
I don't know about wether we should "let go" of some of these things. I'm neither gay nor jewish but I honestly cannot stand for trash like this having the title of videogame, it dishonors the genre and hurts people in more ways than one.The problem, there's no objective definition of a good videogame. Taking down something like these will surely create a precedent for witch-hunting valid games not only like Postal, but anything that doesn't fit political correctness. So yeah, anynone is free to create a videogame as dreadful and dishonorable as he pleases, it's a side product of creative freedom, freedom of speech in gamedev area if you like.
The problem, there's no objective definition of a good videogame. Taking down something like these will surely create a precedent for witch-hunting valid games not only like Postal, but anything that doesn't fit political correctness. So yeah, anynone is free to create a videogame as dreadful and dishonorable as he pleases, it's a side product of creative freedom, freedom of speech in gamedev area if you like.
It wasn't taken seriously, nor it meant so.
Should we start with these games, we will end up with Werewolf, because white supremacists crowd tend to favor this one, among other things.