Advertising is not just giving a link to another site - some sites are well known to the extent that nicknames are just as bad. The usual punishments apply here as they do to giving links.
0 Members, Big Brother and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
You've taken that quote completely out of context of the rest of the thread despite agreeing with it below. 'EVERYONE' is a rating. Stop falling back on emotional bias to make a point. You are being hysterical instead of logical.The fact it's a fantasy world also means that it makes no sense to include the feature. This argument works both ways, not just your way.
No, absolutely not. I'm not sure how easy you think making a videogame is, but an option like this is not as simple as including a 'If samesex then baby = null' line. Given how tightly the offspring mechanic works with the marriage feature there would have to be entire portions of the code rewritten, along with all the other parts of the game that interact with said code plus all the bug testing, QA etc. that comes with it.
It may do, it may not. But getting a game rated is time and money, time and money which Nintendo are in no position to be frugal with at the moment.
This is a silly non-issue that bears no relevance to the subject at hand. Just because 10 year olds may be playing GTA in their spare time does not mean that Nintendo are going to suddenly throw caution to the wind and allow you to murder a prostitute in Donkey Kong. It doesn't have any bearing on their leniency at all, they play by the rules because it is the most financially secure option to them. If you are marketing a game to kids, it does not make sense to include a feature which could potentially offend their parents and prohibit them from playing the game and thus making a point of sale. I'm sure this scandal may outrage a few gay dads or lesbian mothers, but it's a numbers game and you don't appease the few if it means losing support of many.
At the end of the day, you really don't have a leg to stand on in this argument.Morally it makes no sense to include the feature. Same-sex marriages are the minority, asking for a game to include the wants and desires of one minority group but not another is basically saying that minority x is more important than minority y which is not only stupid and unfair, it's completely unmeasurable. Last time I checked there was no option to make your Mii travel entirely by wheelchair either, but of course representing same-sex couples in a religious tradition that many people gay and straight don't even care about themselves is far more important, right?
The problem with this argument is that it consistently falls back on emotional-bias and presents the fallacy that only a homophobe could ever oppose such a viewpoint, and as though this wasn't bad enough on its own, when an equally footed emotional-bias argument in the form of able-ism comes into play suddenly those people do not matter?
As dragoncat quite adequately put it, there are lots of people who ARE proud of their disabilities. Acting as though all of them want some kind of escape is a massive insult and once again - you could literally put forward that exact same argument for homophobia ("Homosexuals have life hard enough, being able to play as a straight character is a form of escape for them"). Do you see how offensive THAT may sound? You're acting as though pride is some kind of coping mechanism, try going to a gay pride parade and telling everybody that they are secretly ashamed of themselves and see how far you get.
And finally people are still dodging the point that Nintendo has absolutely no obligation to include this feature anyway. Nintendo doesn't even have an obligation to be tolerant of any minority whatsoever. They make creative works and it is completely up to them how they make them and what beliefs they do or do not convey within such works.
Which paraphrased says "Tomodachi life can't include gay people because children can't see that."
If it works both ways, then you can't use it either, and given I was countering your argument that's kind of my point >_>
Did Hahex not also say he didn't think it'd be reasonable to ask for it added in after release?
But marriage is integral to the game, so if you can't marry the games screwed, but as disabilities wouldn't actually effect gameplay in anyway it's not really a comparable issue.
I don't have an obligation to say 'Sorry' if I accidentally slam a door in someone's face, I still do.
. Only as much time as it would be to have that check at the marriage. You misunderstand my point. If the game originally intended to have same-sex marriage, then there doesn't seem to be much difference time-wise as doing that rather than the current mechanic. I'm not asking for rewritten coding, but I'm considering a Tomodachi Life 2.
That's still true. But even if the rating goes up, I still stand by my claim that the inclusion can still increase sales. Of course, both of us would need some sort of statistic to qualify that, but that's certainly beyond my vision, as well as, I assume, yours. As you said, its a numbers game. I feel that the differences between those against same-sex marriage and those against are less and less great, as time goes on. Its not quite appeasing the few, but rather, choosing an almost equipotent side.
It's completely quantifiable. You can see a petition for Miiquality, you don't see a petition for the disabled.
And its hardly a question of minority vs. minority, either. As I've said before, even though only a few people may fall under the LGBT umbrella, everyone has an opinion on whether or not it is right for people to be homosexual. It wasn't just black slaves who fought in the American Civil War, it was men who supported liberty against men who supported slavery, roughly split in two halves.
All right, I'll acknowledge that there are people who are proud of their disabilities.
Are they proud enough that they're offended when there's no option for them to be disabled in a video game? Is it a feature that people want? There's no evidence to suggest that that is the case.
Fine, that point might have came off a little more harshly than I intended. But like you said, it's a game of numbers. How many people are Nintendo likely to offend by not including gay marriage than they are by not including disabled miis? Nintendo aren't obligated to do anything (aside from abiding by the law, paying taxes etc.)
No it does not, stop taking this out of context. ERSB works on a case-by-case basis. Tomodachi Life is a game for EVERYONE. If you need confirmation of this then check the box art. The point I am making is that this this game is for EVERYONE by ERSB standards and there is a possibility that Nintendo (or even the ERSB) could decide that including such a feature may well be outside of this rating therefore they do not include it under protection of that rating alone. Whether or not the rating IS affected by the feature is not important.Stop being hysterical and relying on emotional bias. I will not ask you again.
My argument was a counter to people who believe it should be included. You're countering a counterpoint that needs no counter.
Then there is absolutely no reason for this to be such a fuss 2 years after the release of the game. It's not even reasonable to get angry about it full stop. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Don't wait years for the localization and then suddenly act as though this comes as some kind of surprise.
Actually, it's not. There is no part of the game which forces you to marry or even implies you must do to get the most from the game.
All this is is unnecessary public shaming pure and simple. And for what? Acceptance of the minority in question?
Under what circumstance does bullying a neutral party into apologizing publicly for not including a same-sex marriage feature (in one single game) help the cause at large? All this does is instill a culture of fear and resentment and give the message that anyone who doesn't comply with these beliefs will find themselves and their company at risk in doing so. Shades of fascism come to mind. People wonder why companies like Microsoft can purport outright misogynistic and homophobic dogma and make so much money in doing so, this is why; because the alternative is a divided fanbase and bad PR.
Whether or not the rating itself is important is, on the other hand, a lot more important.This line of thought is getting out of hand. Tomodachi Life is set in a fantasy world. It's solely up to the developers, whether or not to include same-sex marriage or not. I haven't even heard of the game until recently, at what point would people be able to voice their complaints when it was an unknown game in Japan? I'm sorry I can't keep up with Japan only releases, and that I get surprised when this sort of stuff comes over (Well, honestly I'm not too surprised. It seems the stance on same-sex marriage is different in Japan than it is elsewhere. If I was in charge of making the game, I probably wouldn't have included same-sex marriage either, at least initially.) But wouldn't it be nice if everyone at least had an opportunity to experience the same thing from the same game? You keep saying that my arguments are emotionally biased, but then that's not necessarily fallacious. If you do something that makes other people feel bad, then that's not a good action. Well, yeah.It's not facism. It's people letting a company know that the product they're providing does not meet their expectations in several ways. Don't companies all across the world spend millions of dollars looking for feedback? Here we are giving it for free. Companies already live in a state of perpetual fear. Will our new product sell enough to make a profit? Is our country's political relationship going to remain stable enough to continue exporting across the world? Are our investors happy with the amount of money we've made this financial year? If someone's trying to sell you ice cream in the middle of winter, then you won't buy it. If Nintendo release a life sim without same-sex marriage, 'people' (some?) won't buy it. This isn't an emotional argument at all. Nintendo release a product that people may not want because it doesn't have same-sex marriage. At the same time, if said game had same-sex marriage, then they would buy it. Since it doesn't have it, they won't buy it. If they don't let that be known, then maybe Nintendo will attribute the lack of sales to the wrong reasons: maybe the western market just don't 'get' it, maybe they didn't advertise enough, maybe they should've had more Reggie in the trailers. This is an expression of people who want to have their same-sex marriage in a life sim, and they're letting Nintendo know it. Or is it really? Are you right when you say that people are expecting companies to lead the way in same-sex marriage reforms and don't actually care about the game itself? I can't say that I was particular interested in the game either way, and yet here I am spending hours debating about it on a Pokemon forum. My argument pivots on whether or not people would've boycotted the game when they would've initially considered buying it, before Nintendo issued their apologies. Then the other good point that you made is that Nintendo is merely trying to somewhat express the general culture that the world is in right now, in its own weird way. The majority of the world still doesn't accept same-sex marriage, after you include the majority of Africa, Russia, China, half of America and Japan themselves. Is it too early to be then demanding that same-sex marriage should be allowed in their games? I haven't totally convinced myself away from those two points, the first one more so than the latter. But as it stands, the fact that Nintendo has issued an apology after this controversy has certainly drawn attention to the game. I think the saying goes, "All news is good news," or something along those lines, and I don't feel that at the end of the day Nintendo came out worse after this.
To be honest, you don't see gay couples in Pokémon (when you battle the partners in double battles), but no-one has made a deal of it. It might not be integral to the game, but it's something to draw comparison to. It's all blown a bit far out of proportion, whether Nintendo actually thought about it is unknown to us...but I don't think they left it out just to cause a stir.
I'm distinguishing between what they can do and what they "should" do. I CAN go outside and open up a lemonade stand on the streets in the middle of a winter night in some dodgy place in London. It's not a financially safe thing to do, and its probably not good for my well being either. But as a company who, as you keep pointing out, are in deep financial troubles right now, they should be primarily concerned with trying to salvage whatever they can make. Now whether or not including same-sex marriage will be a good move or not is questionable, but we can't debate that. Yes, I totally agree with, Nintendo are a great company and are far more conclusive than the rest of the big three. Does that make them exempt from all criticism in the world? No, even the best of us 'make mistakes'. And honestly, I don't buy that Nintendo are filling up all of their eggs in the one basket that is Tomodachi Life. If it flops a little, then that's not going to look great for Nintendo, but it's not as if their entire hopes are riding on this one game. And if it somehow does, then Nintendo have grossly misrepresented and underestimated the market that their trying to sell to. And this so called controversy will not ultimately "bite Nintendo in the back", so to speak. As I've mentioned, plenty of people had not heard about Tomodachi Life before this controversy. Maybe you have, maybe I'm slightly more ignorant than others in the Nintendo scene. But the game's now been covered in dozens of news sites all across the internet. So has their first apology, which didn't seem great, but also their second. I don't see how it could be anything other than free advertising. Maybe initially, Nintendo was painted as some demon, homophobic company, but now, they're a company that is committed to change. Your argument that this event is going to somehow lead to the death of Nintendo is completely and utterly overstated. If people choosing to not buy products that they don't want is facism to you, then I'm afraid to say that you live in a facist world then. The principle of people buying things that they want is totally how our economy works. Let's assume that, you know what, people love everything that Nintendo ever makes from now on. These guys are in financial trouble, you know, we should help them out by buying every single game they ever make from now on. That's even more ridiculous than the situation we're in now.
If people choosing to not buy products that they don't want is facism to you, then I'm afraid to say that you live in a facist world then.
Censorship of art in the interest of personal belief is fascism.
Your argument that this event is going to somehow lead to the death of Nintendo is completely and utterly overstated
complain about the lack of a trivial feature in a trivial game during one of the most financially decisive moments of Nintendo's fate.
I don't buy that Nintendo are filling up all of their eggs in the one basket that is Tomodachi Life.
a trivial feature in a trivial game
turner why'd you go for the 20 quote post and not my simple question,
turner are you actually gay yourself or not, just curious
Just to make my view clear - I don't think Nintendo should have included the feature if they analysed it to be a bad thing for their company, but I don't see any harm in them apologising and I don't think it was unreasonable for people to ask it to be included. I DO think it's unreasonable if people keep persisting to have e feature added when Nintendo have said they can't include it and have apologised.
You're acting as though this incident was handled in an adult manner. If only it was as calm and sensible as people saying 'Well then I'm not going to buy this'. But no, we got the "NOT INCLUDING MINORITY x IS xPHOBIC AND OFFENSIVE" crowd instead.
How are you in any position to say what is or isn't 'overstated' when you've just interpreted a post in this way? Or are you really arguing that Nintendo's financial situation is as good as it has ever been?
Talk about moving the goal posts, all you are doing now is falling back on strawman arguments, presumably because you haven't actually countered a single point in this thread, you've only shoehorned your opinion in as fact and expected everyone to swallow it.
For your information, Nintendo shouldn't do anything. There is absolutely nothing they 'should' do, regardless of your passive aggressive pressure. They CAN make videogames, but they don't have a right to do so and they certainly don't have a right or responsibility to include minority (or majority) groups. You are fans of them, not vice versa - it's not their responsibility to please and entertain them. You by being a fan are the one who buys the product and if you don't like the product then don't buy it just as you wouldn't buy any other videogame for not including a feature, but don't act like there is some kind of homophobia or discrimination going on, because there is not.
Are you serious? Every time a new console comes out there is a fresh partition to remap the controller buttons so disabled people are able to play the games. There is a market dedicated to peripherals for disabled people to play the games and this is just so they can play the games, let alone be represented in them. If you are honestly suggesting that disabled gamers form a smaller minority than homosexual players (that wish to marry in-game) then I have absolutely nothing to say, because that is insanity.
Ah yes but remember this is a risk/reward scenario. How many LGBT supporters will continue to play Tomodachi Life upon finding out at it will not include same-sex marriage? How many homosexuals played Harvest Moon? How many trans* people played AC before there was the freedom to express gender that New Leaf gave us? How many trans* people played Pokemon before there was an option to even choose gender? How many non-binary people continue to play Pokemon to this day? The list goes on, but the long and the short of it is that these people will play videogames regardless as they have done so far, so as far as any video game developer is concerned, there is no potential drastic loss in sales in excluding them. Compare that to the bashers, the right wing nutjobs, American soccer moms and bible bashers - many of which own Nintendo consoles because they believe that Nintendo has games which will not burst the bubble they force their child to live within. There was a movement to ban Pokemon by these people who didn't like that it contained concepts of evolution, they are extremists who absolutely will pull the purse strings if a game features something even slightly offensive to their beliefs and make no mistake, they will not allow their little Jimmy to play Tomodachi Life 2 if it means he can virtually marry little Tommy from across the street.