The Naughty Dog Agenda

[Vampirehunter145]

Ok. First of alll, this is gonna be fun. So let us begin.

 

These are my conclusions/opinions. You can agree with them, you can disagree with them. I expect polite and reasonable responses. If you start ranting, crying and insulting like that Naughty Dog employee almost having a seizure because they disagreed with him, consider the line crossed and you will threatened with insults.

 

1.- Naughty Dog indeed has an agenda OR is trying desperately to please all sorts of people pointing to something irrelevant in a game like the sexual orientation of a character or designing strong female characters like: "Look, she is a strong woman. Look, she is lesbian." The problem is not that, the problem is having that choked at you 100+ times during gameplay screwing up other pivotal aspects of it.

 

2.- Welcome to the "first world country" thinking. The same thinking that makes you a target of a lawsuit if you deny your services to a non-straight couple/person, deny practicing an abortion to a woman, making a gesture misunderstood by a woman that later tries to demand you at a court,  or worse, being demanded by a trasgender if you name him/her like a man while he thinks of himself a woman, or a woman while she is thinking herself as a man. I am personally sick of people overeacting to issues that they can overcome if they are mentally strong, but instead, they choose to make a storm in a glass of water, make themselves the center of the stage and almost calling the Army to issue their "problem".

 

3.- This can scalate to a social war and this can mean bad news to Naughty Dog. I repeat, there is no problem seeing gays/lesbians/trasgenders in a videogame, interacting with the characters you control or controling one. But by the love of God, don't push this too many times in a videogame so that you are socially accepted and well seen. It can make you lose potential clients and it can make you look very, very  ridiculous.

 

4.- Emotional maturity, ladies and gentlemen. Maybe it is difficult to achieve it, but, belive me, it is an excellent trait that avoids you of being mad at the world not being as you like or insulting/punching/mocking another person just because he/she is not agreeing with your personal opinion.

 

5.- P.D: That woman admired by the CEO of Naughty Dog (i don't renember her name) is a piece of trash. Yes, i have seen her videos and is one primary example of a "snowflake".

Edited July 22, 2018 by Vampirehunter145
Adding words

[Redgrave]

I think what a lot of people seem to miss with the video is that it isn't about that it shows two girls kissing, it's more of how that seemed to be the main focus of the trailer. Obviously Naughty Dog isn't stupid, and if anything I figured they showed the kiss since they knew it would bring about a way for people to discuss the game one way or another. It certainly stuck out, especially comparing it to the other things that were shown at E3 (more on that below). I personally thought it was forced, and while I don't have a problem with lesbian/gay relationships, I certainly think there's a way one could have characters like that while giving it some substance. I also think the same with straight relationships as well, since having relationships that have no real weight to them is just forced romance, and I really don't like that sort of thing.

 

So what's my point, you're wondering? Well, with what they showed during the trailer, it felt like all we really got was "Ellie is a lesbian" and nothing much else about her character, which should be more important than her being a lesbian. And if a characters main defining trait is their sexual orientation then that just makes a bad character. Why do people like Nathan Drake? It's certainly not because he's straight. It's because he's a funny, charismatic Adventureman that goes on crazy journeys that people in real life wish they could while still finding him relatable in some way. People liked Joel because he was that father figure that knew what the world was like before everything went to hell, and it's easy to think of yourself in his shoes going through those sort of things even if you don't 100% relate to him (like being a father, etc.).

 

Compared to the other things that were shown at E3 such as Sekiro, Ghost of Tsushima, Devil May Cry 5 and so on, I felt really excited especially compared to the last couple of E3's. Pretty much every other game showcased the gameplay and/or the world-building they had going on, something that's actually about the game and the story they are trying to tell, since it felt like they were prioritizing the game and the world they made. The Last of Us II felt like it was trying too hard, since the other games didn't need something like that to showcase that they would be great and generate hype. Though the Rage 2 thing with the Andrew W.K. concert was a bit much, I still give them props for trying.

 

Though yes, it's also a bit early to judge the game right away, as for all we know Ellie might actually get some more character to her. Or at least I hope so. However as the video showed with Naughty Dog's tweets and responses to those sort of things, I can't help but worry that even if Ellie gets more character, her being an actual character will take a backseat to make way for her being a lesbian, which would not only make her character suffer, but likely drag the rest of the game down with it. The gameplay looked fine at least, although I have a feeling that some of the gameplay features they showed might not actually be in the game kind of like how they did with the first Last of Us. But that's a different subject.

 

Basically, if they want to make Ellie a lesbian, fine, but I have my doubts Naughty Dog will really pull it off in a competent way since what they showed and by their current actions they seem to just be waving their arms around and going "Look! We have a lesbian character!" and I worry that if it does wind up being bad because they prioritized her being a lesbian over an actual character, they will just point fingers and say "Well it's the sexists/homophobic's fault!" instead of actually taking a step back and realizing that actually good characters are made by their actions, personality, and how they actually can relate to the player rather than what they are attracted to. I think what people tend to forget is that this also goes for straight characters too. If Nathan Drake's only real trait was that he kissed girls all day and shot bandits he would be boring. And like I've said and has been mentioned in the thread, it just comes off as Naughty Dog trying to virtue signal even though almost every other game shown at E3 didn't have to do anything like that to generate excitement for their games, and I really wouldn't want them to throw away the character Ellie already was in the first game because of it.

[Not_like_therest]

7 hours ago, RedRodriguez87 said:

And that's the core of their problem, really. it isn't the diversity of opinions your "average gamer" wants, its the fact their opinion is no longer the most important. Kinda like Spaz bringing up transgenders, gays, and poc, it's the same old song and dance of wanting to dictate and moderate when something is the correct time/way to represent what ISN'T the majority. And when they head to the internet demanding justice, and told there is none to be given, all of a sudden its forced, pandering, a liberal agenda and (if a dev refuses to back down) an attack on gamers.

 

It's always hilarious who gamers cry about "extreme "progressive" media" in a world where lgbt+ people are still being beaten, killed and discriminated against for the act of existing. Talk about lacking perspective.

 

Exactly, I agree with this. I have seen comments on articles/yt where white guys say that if a game forced them to play as a black guy, it "ruins the immersion for them and refuse to play if char creation isn't included". If we had this kind of tech back in the 60s, they would be making the same asinine comments that they make about gay/lesbian characters being allowed to be a protagonist. And they are the same reasons that "SJW" is considered a slur and an insult. Pointing out how ostracized and humiliated gay people have been treated for being gay whenever some celebrity comes out of the closet ruins their fantasy, no matter how the other has a right to exist independent of their fantasy, embarrasses them for the other to say anything contradictory. That whole, "why is is this news, they should just keep this to themselves" comment, despite that it was less than 20 yrs ago it was widely acceptable to call something negative "gay". 

 

Coming out of the closet ruins the number % of they can apply to rest of the population and "accuse" them of being in the minority. It still isn't legal or safe to be in certain parts of the US, but hearing how many are gay and abused is unnecessary (because it reminds them of their behavior towards gay/lesbian), but its a problem when they- the majority- feel alone by having to hear someone isn't hetro, isn't playing into their fantasy, isn't allowing a stranger to live through them aware or unaware. Even putting a female as the only playable character breaks that "ol boys club" herd mentality that they are forced to confront in every other aspect of their lives, professional and recreational. "You are not like me, you cannot exist here".

 

Maybe it is an agenda, but it isn't a BAD agenda to have. It just isn't an agenda if you already acknowledge that your "fantasy" isn't the only thing that should be the center of all things. If you have to be educated that gay/lesbians have the same right to exist independently of your opinion on how they "should exist", that being in a same sex relationship should not be grounds for an insult or an assault. Or to be educated that not everyone wants/ or is born to be like you, then you do need an agenda. An educational agenda, and therein lies the problem. Anything seen as educational is seen as overbearing, scorned, and patronizing...at least here in the US. 

 

 

7 hours ago, NathanielJohn said:

Comparing that to Ellie, the game's main character, is just silly. Showing her kiss someone is not "highlighting her sexuality as a defining characteristic". It's watching a main character be a human being. A main character that we're supposed to be interested in getting to know (and whose sexuality was introduced in the DLC for TLoU 1, by the way).

 

Nathan kissed Elena dozens of times throughout the Uncharted games. Does that make his sexuality a defining characteristic of him? Or is it only when gay people kiss that it becomes defining and not OK?

 

That is the problem isn't it for a lot of other people, that gay/lesbians are human beings. That last paragraph, exactly what I am talking about above. Drake is them, Elena is their "fantasy". No one can ever exist outside their fantasy. It does define something that they are not, and that is never acceptable. 

 

It doesn't matter how many on twitter, reddit, etc feel marginalized or think inclusion of something else is terrible; the fact that something exists outside of the shadows that does not fit them bothers them. Angers them. If its women in STEM careers, gaming, wanting to be paid equally (especially when they have not had children), then they are seen as intruders and "unworthy". Lesbians are not surprised, we have dealt with this harassment and discrimination for years in the shadows and out as women. Its males who leave the closet, that find out they are not included in the "boys club" the same as before. But they knew that, that is why it took so long for them to leave publicly or else they would be treated the same as women are. 

[Strike-Runner]

They kill Joel I’m ranting on this game that’s it. Also at e3 I understand Neil is trying to push more females as main characters in games but I like Joel more than Elle, Joel has been through a lot and I would hate to see if he dies and all of a sudden it the journey of a mother and a daughter. I expected only gameplay not cutscenes at e3 they wanted to start something with the whole Elle is a lesbian. Look at the first last of us no cutscenes just gameplay amazing gameplay at that time. Don’t forget apparently more games let you play as either a male or female and still sjw still complain about more male as protagonist in games.

[Soufwar]

I’ll say one thing, the Uncharted cast was always diverse, go back to U1 and you’ll find the smartass Drake frienemie Eddy Raja and throughout the whole franchise these games have had amazing inclusiveness and presentation, not today though. Everything feels forced from ND. 

[thefourfoldroot]

1 hour ago, Not_like_therest said:

 

Exactly, I agree with this. I have seen comments on articles/yt where white guys say that if a game forced them to play as a black guy, it "ruins the immersion for them and refuse to play if char creation isn't included". If we had this kind of tech back in the 60s, they would be making the same asinine comments that they make about gay/lesbian characters being allowed to be a protagonist. And they are the same reasons that "SJW" is considered a slur and an insult. Pointing out how ostracized and humiliated gay people have been treated for being gay whenever some celebrity comes out of the closet ruins their fantasy, no matter how the other has a right to exist independent of their fantasy, embarrasses them for the other to say anything contradictory. That whole, "why is is this news, they should just keep this to themselves" comment, despite that it was less than 20 yrs ago it was widely acceptable to call something negative "gay". 

 

Coming out of the closet ruins the number % of they can apply to rest of the population and "accuse" them of being in the minority. It still isn't legal or safe to be in certain parts of the US, but hearing how many are gay and abused is unnecessary (because it reminds them of their behavior towards gay/lesbian), but its a problem when they- the majority- feel alone by having to hear someone isn't hetro, isn't playing into their fantasy, isn't allowing a stranger to live through them aware or unaware. Even putting a female as the only playable character breaks that "ol boys club" herd mentality that they are forced to confront in every other aspect of their lives, professional and recreational. "You are not like me, you cannot exist here".

 

Maybe it is an agenda, but it isn't a BAD agenda to have. It just isn't an agenda if you already acknowledge that your "fantasy" isn't the only thing that should be the center of all things. If you have to be educated that gay/lesbians have the same right to exist independently of your opinion on how they "should exist", that being in a same sex relationship should not be grounds for an insult or an assault. Or to be educated that not everyone wants/ or is born to be like you, then you do need an agenda. An educational agenda, and therein lies the problem. Anything seen as educational is seen as overbearing, scorned, and patronizing...at least here in the US. 

 

 

 

That is the problem isn't it for a lot of other people, that gay/lesbians are human beings. That last paragraph, exactly what I am talking about above. Drake is them, Elena is their "fantasy". No one can ever exist outside their fantasy. It does define something that they are not, and that is never acceptable. 

 

It doesn't matter how many on twitter, reddit, etc feel marginalized or think inclusion of something else is terrible; the fact that something exists outside of the shadows that does not fit them bothers them. Angers them. If its women in STEM careers, gaming, wanting to be paid equally (especially when they have not had children), then they are seen as intruders and "unworthy". Lesbians are not surprised, we have dealt with this harassment and discrimination for years in the shadows and out as women. Its males who leave the closet, that find out they are not included in the "boys club" the same as before. But they knew that, that is why it took so long for them to leave publicly or else they would be treated the same as women are. 

Utter rubbish. Forcing people to conform to stereotypes and/or reducing their character to merely their sexuality/race/gender does not a rounded character make. I believe the point of the video was that an "agenda" is something which impinges upon creating full characters; it'd usually either real world social commentary or an attempt to get good press (or avoid bad) from a certain demographic. 

Now I believe in the case of TLoU it was just a trailer, and I trust ND to do good by their character, but in general the above is true. 

And, for the record, I always play as the woman when given the choice. It rarely makes any difference to the games plot, but is something a bit nicer to look at. I don't feel it's hard to relate to a female character, an alien character etc, etc. 

 

[HellcoreFire]

Lara Croft looks the same in all three games: "Oh no, she looks different in every game." Ellie actually looks completely different from the first game: "Oh no, she kissed a girl." Lol.

[nyonmyan]

2 hours ago, ImplyingYouCare said:

Medieval people absolutely were gay. King James was openly gay and used passages from the bible to justify his sexuality to the church. The Greeks and the Romans very open about homosexuality and it was constantly displayed in their art and writing. The Indian people had a class called the Hijra who were made up of transgender, intersex, or gender nonconforming people. The Jewish people recognized six different genders including special ones for trans and intersex people. The Native Americans celebrated same-sex marriage and a gender called Two-Spirit, which is still recognized and used by native people today.

Yeah, Greeks were big fans of teenage boys and their buttholes (maybe still are). But none of your examples, however, was struggling for survival at the time.

Struggling groups usually stone to death, burn alive or exile those who refuse to conform to gender norms and duties.

 

3 hours ago, ImplyingYouCare said:

Gay people are going to exist, apocalypse or not. And you know what, if they do it right this adds some solid conflict and tension to the story. People wanting Ellie to possibly pass on her immunity genes vs her own goals to be with the girl she loves and support her community in other ways. Also, Ellie is NOT the only immune person. The first game's ending makes it very clear they've been experimenting with more people than just her. The first game had her nearly die for the possibility of a cure, and the ending is entirely about how she didn't owe them that. She doesn't owe them children for the possibility of a future cure either. Living for yourself and your own goals is not offensive. 

Experiments involving other people mean absolutely nothing. The game makes clear that the other characters had no idea that immunity could possibly exist when they first encounter the girl.

They wouldn't be shocked if a single habitat had multiple people with immunity.

 

I'm not trying to condone the girl for being selfish, by the way. In fact, I would be surprised if she'd acted in the interest of majority. The shitty part is how the game tries to be a gay pride parade, instead of depicting a realistic reaction of in-game characters.

[TJ_Solo]

7 minutes ago, HellcoreFire said:

Lara Croft looks the same in all three games: "Oh no, she looks different in every game." Ellie actually looks completely different from the first game: "Oh no, she kissed a girl." Lol.

 

If you're on the internet there's nothing to do but complain and have fake outrage over things that have been present in various forms for ages.
"But not in our video games!!!" is a common cry when people try to put this hobby in a vacuum w/ selective memory. 

[Hayades]

Hate the obvious agenda pushing and those defending it while not understanding why people dislike what they see. It's like Ghostbusters 2016 all over again. Females or lesbians aren't the problem, it's the sjw virtue/gender/orientation signaling and personal politics that people can't stand. I couldn't care less about lesbians kissing, heck, the kiss in the dlc took me by surprise but it was well executed so I rolled with it but this one is forced as heck. The violence and gore feels forced too. Lost all respect for Nd for this and for the fact that druckman is a friend and fan of anita sarkosian. By the way remember the bald asian chick in the trailer. Yea, she's transgendered (can't forget about the buff butch chick in there too). Only thing missing now is a one-legged hermaphrodite. Can't forget hermaphrodites and handicapped people now, can we ND. 

[pinkrobot_pb]

2 hours ago, Soufwar said:

I’ll say one thing, the Uncharted cast was always diverse, go back to U1 and you’ll find the smartass Drake frienemie Eddy Raja and throughout the whole franchise these games have had amazing inclusiveness and presentation, not today though. Everything feels forced from ND. 

I think the problem is that since then it's become a major topic. You're either in favour or against and that kills all nuance. It's not so much what does or does not happen in a movie, TV show or video game, it's the emphasis that is put on it by both creators and consumers. And the "Look at us we are so cool for doing this" mentality is what irks even this ancient hippie anarchist right here.

Edited July 22, 2018 by pinkrobot_pb

[BeautifulTorment]

12 hours ago, Spaz said:

 

Mainstream TV takes a long time to catch up and from what I see of it it's run by old farts who don't understand the world they're living in.

 

I guess I should have been a bit more specific. I mean mainstream TV in the realm of Netflix shows. Some of their lowest-common-denominator teeny-bopper shows are focused so heavily on the sexual orientation of the main character that the whole plot-line is obfuscated. The amount of video game characters and TV main characters who are homosexual (and believe me, I have no issue with those who are as it applies to the story) is so disproportional to real life. Why does every show need to have a token lesbian?

[Lucas]

While @Hayades post above me isn't exactly how I'd describe it, it sums up the basics of how I (and probably the OP and the video too) feel. I haven't read this entire thread but I do completely agree with the OP. Forcefully adding political agendas into videogames to show how progessive and open-minded you are (as a company) is disgusting in my eyes. I love the Naughty Dog games, but seeing as they are basically leading this revolution in the video game industry right now is gross and kind of worrying. I'm not a feminist or progessive, left-wing person but  I have the utmost respect for anyone who is or shares part of their ideology. However, I don't want a video game developer to shove it in my face for no good reason whatsoever. Nadine Ross in Uncharted 4 was a good example of this. Sure, women can be powerful and strong too (look at Aloy from HZD for example) but they way they shoved her into the game with no good reason for her extreme powers and no reasonable backstory was one of the many things that showed Naughty Dog's true colors. Aloy from Horizon is a powerful woman too but has a reasonable backstory to support that, Nadine gets shoved into our faces just because Naughty Dog wants to show their political correctness. This is a bad evolution in the industry.

[NathanielJohn]

1 hour ago, BeautifulTorment said:

The amount of video game characters and TV main characters who are homosexual (and believe me, I have no issue with those who are as it applies to the story) is so disproportional to real life.

 

I don't watch a lot of TV, so I can't comment on that, but you really find this to be a problem in video games? I don't think I can name more than 1 or 2 games per year with openly homosexual characters.

 

List of games with all heterosexual romances from my profile that I can remember: all Final Fantasy games, all Infamous games, all Uncharted games, Horizon Zero Dawn, all God of War games, all(?) GTA games, Red Dead Redemption, Heavy Rain, Beyond Two Souls.

 

List of games with at least one homosexual romance from my profile that I can remember: Bioware games and TLoU. And it's the exact same thing when Bioware games come out too -- an internet shitstorm about how it's being shoved in our faces and is so disproportionate.

[DennisWilles]

The focus should always be on a good story with good characters. Being gay or colored doesn't make your character more interesting and if you advertise only that, I assume your game won't have much depth to it. I don't like it if game developers force sexuality on a game that wouldn't have needed it in the first place. If you choose to bash a certain group (whether it's straight white men or pansexual helicopters) and make your game your political agenda, you have already ruined it.

 

I for one would have loved a trailer that emphasizes on Ellie and Joel.. you know, the interesting lead character we grew to love throughout the first game.

[Dreakon13]

8 hours ago, Spaz said:

Lara Croft, Nadine, Chloe Frasier, Aloy, Ellie, Ciri, this generation is rather fixated on creating strong but nearly indestructible female figures.

 

Half of that list are from Naughty Dog games...

 

Spoiler

... where they virtually never kill off main characters, male or female.  And have in the past killed off numerous female side characters/villians.

 

I can probably list on one hand only mainstream story-driven games where one of the controllable main characters die at the end, fewer where those games don't also have female characters that can/do die as well.  The fact that you can pick out a few where females happen to be the main characters (which is still a pretty small number) and 'generally don't die' (Tomb Raider has particularly brutal death sequences when you screw up, mind you) doesn't necessarily indicate a trend sweeping the gaming industry, it's a common practice for main characters to stay alive in general... since winning/beating a game generally means not dying.  Seems like people are connecting dots that aren't there sometimes.

 

 

On an unrelated note...

I had a friend on Steam who happened to be homosexual (I say 'had' because despite being a perfectly respectable human being, he had this irrational asshole streak in him).  Huge gamer.  One day I posted a status out to the masses asking why everyone was so excited and throwing parades that Blizzard revealed an Overwatch character was lesbian.  The game, to my knowledge, has very minimal story/lore behind it... so it was purely for show, for the PR.  He pulled me aside and we discussed it a little bit.  While he didn't care that much about Overwatch, it was just exciting to him to see homosexuality represented in such a wildly popular mainstream game.  That his orientation was so hidden and taboo growing up (he's an older gentleman), that he appreciated the pendulum starting to swing the other way... even if arguably unnecessary at times.

 

And it kinda dawned on me.  In Overwatch's case, the inclusion of homosexuality was harmless.  It made this guy genuinely happy... and as much as these people were oppressed in the past (and still are in many places), I believe that we're on the cusp of something here.  Sure, some developers may use it as a marketing ploy by tapping into social agendas for popularity and sales.  Sure, it may not be any more necessary to the plot of a game than a heterosexual relationship often is.  Sure, it may even end up feeling excessive at times if things go the way certain people want it to.  But... the more often it's put out there now, the more "normal" it'll be when the dust settles in 5-10 years or however long.  And that's the goal, equality and normalcy.  That's why homosexuality, female leads, etc... popping up in unexpected places isn't a problem to me.  In fact, I welcome it (done with quality of course, as I'd expect any game to be).  I wouldn't want to fight against that.

 

Unfortunately, even the people arguing for inclusion in many cases don't understand that it's a long term play.  They want change now, now, now and will kick, scream and throw passive aggressive tantrums with all their Twitter followers until they get it... which tends to lead to people wanting to argue with them and play devil's advocate as the opposite extreme even if they don't necessarily have anything against inclusion.

Edited July 22, 2018 by Dreakon13

[ProfBambam55]

23 minutes ago, NathanielJohn said:

GTA games...

the ballad of gay tony...one of the best single player add-ons ever...haha...

[Undead Wolf]

It's nice to come back online and see this thread hasn't crashed and burned, so props to everyone for keeping it civil.

 

I feel like a lot of people have misunderstood the point of the video or what I and other like-minded people have been saying. I shouldn't even have to say this, but of course I have no problem with gay characters in video games, it just bothers me when that becomes the defining characteristic of a character and is constantly being shoved in your face. Why was the lesbian kiss the first thing they showed in the E3 2018 demo? It's fine if that scene exists in the game, but we don't have any context for it at all. Just seems like it was only shown front and center like that to pander to a certain audience, hence why I mentioned the "progressive" games media eating it up - seems like they focused more on that than the actual gameplay. The sad thing about all of this is that Naughty Dog have already portrayed a gay character very well in the The Last of Us 1 (Bill), but now it feels like they are taking a step backwards by parading Ellie's sexuality around like they're doing now.

 

I also want to thank everyone who understood the point of the video instead of just assuming everyone who doesn't like the direction Naughty Dog are heading in are homophobic/transphobic. As @Hayades rightly pointed out, it's like Ghostbusters 2016 all over again.

 

13 hours ago, fastflowdaman said:

DD remained in the remasters, there's even a trophy for completing the game with said skin for each of the 3 parts. They removed him for part 4.

 

Ah yes, you're totally right. I confused the two for some reason.

 

12 hours ago, BG_painter said:

Thank you SO MUCH @Undead Wolf for posting this. We r on the same side of opinions here, so bro fist

 

Haha, I'm glad I could bring it to your attention! I like the way you think. 

 

7 hours ago, Phil said:

I guess I misunderstood what he was talking about.

 

@Undead Wolf if that's correct, I retract you from the naughty list. To be fair, other than like a few people, my naughty list is forgotten pretty fast.

 

That's one hell of a misunderstanding! I'm actually kind of insulted you thought I sympathised with that garbage human. 

 

5 hours ago, ImplyingYouCare said:

Also, Ellie is NOT the only immune person. The first game's ending makes it very clear they've been experimenting with more people than just her.

 

Actually...

Spoiler

Ellie IS the only immune person known to exist in that game. When Joel told Ellie there's a whole lot more like her, he was lying so she didn't feel bad about it. Of course she saw through the lie but accepted what he said anyway (the scene right before the credits roll). I thought everyone knew that.

 

[Dreakon13]

29 minutes ago, Undead Wolf said:

Why was the lesbian kiss the first thing they showed in the E3 2018 demo?

 

I mean, who knows, the game isn't out yet... but one would have to assume it's because Ellie is a very important character to the series, and that relationship may very well play a role with Ellie's motivations in the story of the upcoming game.  And a kiss is a pretty sufficient way of establishing that two people aren't just close friends.

Edited July 22, 2018 by Dreakon13

[GT__Jedi]

All game developers evolve with time, and take into account social issues and just how to keep their audience interested.  Seeing how the games have changed over time could be applied to many developers.  It's just keep evolving or get kicked to the side of the road.  The other approach could be to throw the cards at a wall and see which stick. 

 

When I play a game I really don't take them that seriously or feel there is an agenda.

[Breakingthegreen]

I'm not sure why the topic of having LGBT+ characters in the game is seen as an agenda. Having characters with green eyes is equally as much of an agenda. 

 

Something I've also noticed is that themes of political significance is seen as agenda pushing. But debates about the connection between video games and real life, (debates about gun violence, mental health, and SWATting,) and the reactions are "It's only video games". I'm not saying either is right, but at least be consistent.

 

Also in that video, did they really use ND retweeting gay fan art as agenda pushing. That's call fan engagement, many companies do that, the only difference is that ND is open to LGBT+ fan fiction.

Also, a note on the ending, saying that he wants ND to write entertaining stories without agendas. That is a nearly impossible feat, let's look and at Crash Bandicoot and Jak and Daxter 1. Both stories feature villains that interfere with nature to create abominations. Both stories feature sage characters that represent nature. Now, of course, the environmental agenda is deliberate, (and correct in my opinion,) but stories that try not to feature an agenda like Call of Juarez: The Cartel, will often, and indirectly create an agenda,( in The Cartel's case, the Mexican drug war is causing American women to get trafficked.) 

[RedRodriguez87]

1 hour ago, breakingthegreen said:

I'm not sure why the topic of having LGBT+ characters in the game is seen as an agenda. Having characters with green eyes is equally as much of an agenda. 

 

Because again, its something that makes gamer uncomfortable, and in the case here, something they can't easily ignore. 

 

"I don't have a problem with gays BUT" seems to be a common theme around here.

 

[sheouttathere]

13 hours ago, Phil said:

Anita Sarkeesian is a piece of shit human being. Not sure why anybody gives her a voice at all. Her words carry as much weight as a fart bubble as far as I'm concerned. I think pissing on her is a waste of piss. Her, and people like her, are what's making the liberal left seem like pieces of shit. There was a time when the liberal left were the good guys. Now, because of people like her, and of late, Jessica Price, being a feminist liberal is just as bad as being a gun toting, Trump voting, conservative, redneck...not to say Clinton would have been better...just saying.

 

So yea, to @Undead Wolf, since you sympathize with Anita and feel for her, you instantly go on the naught list in my book. I'm sure you don't give a shit though...and that's ok.

 

Also, if you are finding conspiracy theories in video games, you aren't playing enough video games. Maybe, just maybe, you need another hobby to take up more spare time that you have. Maybe carpentry, for example. Welding? Auto repair? Almost anything is healthier than nit picking out conspiracy theories. 

 

I’m proud to be an American and I would appreciate it if you would save your political slams for Twitter along with the likeminded hatemongers on that site. 

 

Your bottom statement is relevant to this discussion and even inspiring imo. Maybe, “just maybe” you could learn to shave off the repulsive negativity before you post so that we can hear more of your gaming wisdom. Your words conjure up images that are hard to delete once read.  ?

[madbuk]

4 hours ago, Undead Wolf said:

It's nice to come back online and see this thread hasn't crashed and burned, so props to everyone for keeping it civil.

 

I feel like a lot of people have misunderstood the point of the video or what I and other like-minded people have been saying. I shouldn't even have to say this, but of course I have no problem with gay characters in video games, it just bothers me when that becomes the defining characteristic of a character and is constantly being shoved in your face. Why was the lesbian kiss the first thing they showed in the E3 2018 demo? It's fine if that scene exists in the game, but we don't have any context for it at all. Just seems like it was only shown front and center like that to pander to a certain audience, hence why I mentioned the "progressive" games media eating it up - seems like they focused more on that than the actual gameplay.

The Last of Us is a very story driven franchise. The gameplay of the first game was rather terrible (as was the story, but hey, they tried.) As such, they focused more on the story than the gameplay here because that's understandable for a game like TLoU. They opened with a kiss and a party scene because it highlights that even in the bleak times that everyone lives in, you can find happiness and someone to care for. Not all hope is lost. We all know that she's going to die, because it's a zombie game, but Ellie doesn't know that yet and she deserves some happiness I would think. It was more to show her growing up and being more independent than it was to show "hey look guys we have a lesbian we're inclusive." She doesn't need Joel to protect her anymore, as shown by the fact he was completely absent. She's grown up, she's found someone to care about and has moved on with her life.

[dadoudelidou]

 

Lets agree on one thing, ND are masters at telling stories. Point. In the previous game ,TLoU, I cried of joy and cried of sadness. It was a masterpiece of storytelling.

 

I truely think they do not have an agenda, besides of telling amazing stories.  

 

If you think they have an agenda...

Well Rockstar too..

And City Red Project too..

And don't get me started on Square Enix !

 

In fact, the only company WITHOUT an agenda would be EA ! Yesss !

 

If you do not want anyone to tell you who to f*** in your games , stick to Mass Effect or Dragon Age. 

Hell, you'll be able to get your kink on with women, guys, aliens, mountain trolls without anyone telling you how to do it . 

 

Saying that ND has a gay agenda for one character is nonsense.

 

Don't forget, between 10-15 % of the north American population is LGBT. 

Take the last 25 games out and how much of those touch the LGBT matter ??Surely less than 10% so seeing any gay agenda here is in my opinion irrelevant.