Support NeoGAF

[MLH]

The campaign seems to have done more harm to Nintendo, including the prospects of further localizations of Tomodachi Life and the reception of that title, than good.

It's saddening as the context is not explained and the headlines are aggressive:



I know quite a few folks at Nintendo that are gay and deeply enjoy working at Nintendo. The portrayal of Nintendo's stance on LGBT communities in the media could not be farther from the truth.

Yeah it's pretty crazy, It seems Nintendo just wants to remain neutral in this whole debate, which is fine - as they say "[they] never intended to make any social commentary with the game". But it seems some media outlets want to take the position of neutral as 'anti-gay' or 'if you're not with us you're against us'. Even that BBC headline is pretty sensationalist: "Nintendo says 'No' to gay game characters", um no they didn't, everything Nintendo says is written in their own article and it's pretty clear they never said 'no'.

Nintendo do seem to be listening and have never said they won't allow gay characters in any future iteration of the game, it just seems unlikely to be patched into this version.

 

[Taker666]

Well, you gotta pick if you want to please people who want equality or bigots. If you're making a game about 'life' you can't hide behind neutrality these days especially when Sims sells billions while gay sims have been woo-hooing for years and years.

Sims is a different case ..it's rated T and made by EA.

Tomodachi is rated E and made by a company famed for its safe, family friendly content. Nintendo would be treated far harsher by parent groups than EA. The shitstorm for this game would be far bigger if Nintendo had included the option to be gay IMO.

Best thing to do would proably be to release the standard game at retail and release a seperate gay friendly edition on the eshop.

 

[JennyTablina]

I sure hope Nintendo doesn't just cancel the project if they have the impression that feedback is too negative...

Nintendo are committed to Tomodachi as they've already gone gold with the title. The copies are all pressed. Just being held because May was already kind of full.

I do think jumping to a conclusion that Nintendo hate LGBT people is bit OTT. While I agree yesterdays response is terrible and someone needs a boot up the bum in PR, I'm sure Nintendo's intentions were relatively well meaning if erroneously executed.

That said the answer is bad enough that I'm considering not buying Tomodachi purely because of that PR reply. Maybe that's a touch OTT but I sort of feel like I'ld be a bit offended if someone dismissed my relationship as a "social statement" too. Plus shrugging my shoulders and buying Tomodachi anyway in face of that doesn't feel right.

I don't expect Tomodachi to be fixed, but Nintendo could handle this better really. Hopefully they'll learn from this.

 

[keep]

It seems Nintendo just wants to remain neutral in this whole debate, which is fine - as they say "[they] never intended to make any social commentary with the game".

Just because you keep repeating it doesn't mean it's true. Not allowing gay relationships in a game where you play as your Mii version and you encourage virtual life gameplay is NOT remaining neutral. It may be deliberate, it may an oversight, whatever, but it's certainly not a neutral position.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

Tomodachi is rated E and made by a company famed for its safe, family friendly content.

The implication of this statement is that heterosexual relationships are "family-friendly" but homosexual ones aren't.

 

[Rolodzeo]

The implication of this statement is that heterosexual relationships are "family-friendly" but homosexual ones aren't.

Yeah, I don't understand why so many people associate gay relationships with something that is not family friendly. A gay marriage is a family, and if they have children these can view the absence of gay families portrayals in videogames as something weird and out of touch with reality. Imagine if you only see gay relationship in videogames, and heterosexual are the exception, that would be so weird for straight people.

 

[Owlowiscious]

Just because you keep repeating it doesn't mean it's true. Not allowing gay relationships in a game where you play as your Mii version and you encourage virtual life gameplay is NOT remaining neutral. It may be deliberate, it may an oversight, whatever, but it's certainly not a neutral position.

They didn't 'not allow' gay relationships. They never created gay relationships.

 

[Jintor]

They didn't 'not allow' gay relationships. They never created gay relationships.

Given that they set the rules of this virtual game, it amounts to the same thing.

 

[L Thammy]

Just saw a headline about this on the morning news. Something "Nintendo is refusing to let players play as a gay character in upcoming game". Station is CP24 in Toronto.

Old?

 

[Taker666]

The implication of this statement is that heterosexual relationships are "family-friendly" but homosexual ones aren't.

No..it means there will be a bigger shitstorm from rightwing Christian groups in regards to an E game having gay marriage where young children can play..than a game rated teen which older children can play ..

...and a bigger shitstorn for a family friendly company like Nintendo than a more teen focused company like EA. In the same way Nintendo would be torn to shreds by much of the mainatream media if they had an online service with the racism/sexism/homophobia and swearing of Xbox Live. Some companies will be judged harsher than others due to the demographic they aim at.

 

[mavs]

Just saw a headline about this on the morning news. Something "Nintendo is refusing to let players play as a gay character in upcoming game". Station is CP24 in Toronto.

Old?

It was getting some play in syndicated news yesterday.

 

[Hours Left]

No..it means there will be a bigger shitstorm from rightwing Christian groups in regards to an E game having gay marriage where young children can play..than a game rated teen which older children can play ..

...and a bigger shitstorn for a family friendly company like Nintendo than a more teen focused company like EA. In the same way Nintendo would be torn to shreds by much of the mainatream media if they had an online service with the racism/sexism/homophobia and swearing of Xbox Live. Some companies will be judged harsher than others due to the demographic they aim at.

Gay relationships should in no way affect the rating of a game if they are shown with the same level of intimacy as the straight relationships in the game.

The Sims isn't rated T because it has gay relationships. It's rated T because the content of the game as a whole merits it.

 

[Sixfortyfive]

No..it means there will be a bigger shitstorm from rightwing Christian groups in regards to an E game having gay marriage where young children can play..than a game rated teen which older children can play ..

...and a bigger shitstorn for a family friendly company like Nintendo than a more teen focused company like EA. In the same way Nintendo would be torn to shreds by much of the mainatream media if they had an online service with the racism/sexism/homophobia and swearing of Xbox Live. Some companies will be judged harsher than others due to the demographic they aim at.

It might not be your intention, but this is pretty much concern-trolling.

You are literally arguing that bigots should be placated.

 

[zigg]

No..it means there will be a bigger shitstorm from rightwing Christian groups in regards to an E game having gay marriage where young children can play..than a game rated teen which older children can play ..

I believe the relative sizes of those shitstorms have changed places over the past decades. Holding the position of "the gay is bad for my kids" is quite indefensible in 2014 and makes a person look horribly backward and potentially hateful outside of shrinking circles. Whole swathes of self-identifying Christians, including more and more church leaders, want nothing to do with it.

The tides have turned, basically.

 

[Taker666]

Gay relationships should in no way affect the rating of a game if they are shown with the same level of intimacy as the straight relationships in the game.

The Sims isn't rated T because it has gay relationships. It's rated T because the content of the game as a whole merits it.

I didn't say they would.. I said rightwing Christian parent groups would be more up in arms about it a game rated E including gay relationships, than a game rated T (and they probably wouldn't care about a game rated for adults).The younger demographic that a game targets the more controversy it will cause amongst those groups.

 

[zigg]

On the topic of how this is slipping into the news cycle, the Independent's story is the top tech news on Google News right now.

 

[Owlowiscious]

Given that they set the rules of this virtual game, it amounts to the same thing.

It amounts to being lazy to do less programming.

 

[RyanPierre]

They didn't 'not allow' gay relationships. They never created gay relationships.

I am not allowed to turn into a pumpkin in most games because the game developers did not create the ability for me to do that. It's not incorrect in any way for people to say Nintendo is not allowing gay relationships in the game.

Yeah it's pretty crazy, It seems Nintendo just wants to remain neutral in this whole debate, which is fine - as they say "[they] never intended to make any social commentary with the game". But it seems some media outlets want to take the position of neutral as 'anti-gay' or 'if you're not with us you're against us'.

You do realize that it's impossible to remain "neutral" on this issue, right? Either they recognize homosexual relationships in the game or they don't. Nintendo did not emerge from a cave recently with no concept of this thing called "homosexuality," as much as they might want people to believe that.

If they don't want to allow for gay relationships in a localization of their game, that's their choice. But anyone who thinks that makes them "neutral" must not have any idea how frustrating such a sentiment is to people who just want their life experience to be acknowledged as legitimately as everyone else's.

"Sorry, but you can't have your same-sex relationship represented in the game. Please understand that this design choice wasn't anti-gay at all. Nintendo was just being neutral." No, excluding the option of homosexuality from your life simulator game is not fucking neutral.

 

[Waylon Drums]

It amounts to being lazy to do less programming.

You're up and down this entire thread so I have to ask: do you not want gay relationships in there at all? I'm trying to figure out why someone who isn't directly affected by this is so passionate in explaining to people why they're wrong for wanting inclusion.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Woo, that playful alternate world line was an extremely bad idea. Makes it sound like "in our fantasy world, there are no gay people!"

Hopefully this campaign gets some of the decision makers at Nintendo to start thinking more when they make decisions.

 

[civilstrife]

Putting marriage in a game like this at all is not a "neutral position ".

They had to expect this.

Every life sim game should employ a system like The Sims. Everybody is just a few hugs and flirty jokes away from turning gay

 

[Stet]

http://www.thestar.com/business/201..._no_to_samesex_relationships_in_new_game.html

The Toronto Star article about it. Good press, OP.

 

[zroid]

I can't believe the mainstream media has jumped on this as much as it has

I saw it on the ticker on my local news channel...

 

[monlo]

have they added furry marriage yet

 

[HowZatOZ]

I can't believe the mainstream media has jumped on this as much as it has

I saw it on the ticker on my local news channel...

These kind of social attitudes will always draw in a crowd. It is a shame though, I'm sure Nintendo want to support all types of sexualities, but they are porting an already existing game with little effort put into it, redesigning for gay marriage would be far too difficult. You are basically rewriting the entire game if you do that, so I expect it to appear in newer titles.

In regards to the social reaction, its either a you do or you don't stance sadly, and no one can ever stay neutral these days.

 

[civilstrife]

have they added furry marriage yet

Assuming you're trying to make some kind of point:

Being gay is not a "kink".

 

[Conan-san]

Really? We're going to get up in arms about what amounts to the video game equivalent of a 8 year old mashing two action figures together and making comical kissing noises?

 

[MLH]

You do realize that it's impossible to remain "neutral" on this issue, right? Either they recognize homosexual relationships in the game or they don't. Nintendo did not emerge from a cave recently with no concept of this thing called "homosexuality," as much as they might want people to believe that.

If they don't want to allow for gay relationships in a localization of their game, that's their choice. But anyone who thinks that makes them "neutral" must not have any idea how frustrating such a sentiment is to people who just want their life experience to be acknowledged as legitimately as everyone else's.

"Sorry, but you can't have your same-sex relationship represented in the game. Please understand that this design choice wasn't anti-gay at all. Nintendo was just being neutral." No, excluding the option of homosexuality from your life simulator game is not fucking neutral.

Of course you can be neutral on gay rights, it's called not taking part. I'm not told I'm not allowed to eat at a restaurant because I'm gay, or alternatively if someone is homophobic, (I'm not saying that doesn't happen, I've seen a few threads on GAF about not serving gay couples) but these businesses will serve anyone, and that is remaining neutral. Nintendo going with 'traditional' marriage (if you pardon the phrase) is not anti-gay it's just going with they way things are, as bad as that may seem.
As for me I'm all for gay rights and gay marriage, but I'm not out on the streets protesting or campaigning in anyway, I'm like many other people - I'm not taking part so we may as well be neutral.

It really hurts me that I feel I have to play devil's advocate here because I'm also in favour of the OPs campaign and hopefully Nintendo includes it in this game or the next, But I believe some of you are just overreacting, Nintendo is not some anti-gay company with an agenda - the issue is not as clean cut as being for or against gay marriage. There are issues here that need to be discussed, and have been; mainly around the Japanese family culture, which ignores anyone not part of it and hopefully this campaign can help Nintendo change a bit (I have no idea how Nintendo, or Japanese people in general perceives western values on relationships, maybe this campaign will teach them something).

 

[Waylon Drums]

Really? We're going to get up in arms about what amounts to the video game equivalent of a 8 year old mashing two action figures together and making comical kissing noises?

No. We're going to keep speaking up when we're overlooked and devalued. You're going to come into posts and snark about something serious that warrants actual discussion.

 

[zroid]

These kind of social attitudes will always draw in a crowd. It is a shame though, I'm sure Nintendo want to support all types of sexualities, but they are porting an already existing game with little effort put into it, redesigning for gay marriage would be far too difficult. You are basically rewriting the entire game if you do that, so I expect it to appear in newer titles.

In regards to the social reaction, its either a you do or you don't stance sadly, and no one can ever stay neutral these days.

Yea it's much too late for this game. But I would be really surprised if the next one doesn't include the option now, considering all that's happened.

 

[Stet]

Really? We're going to get up in arms about what amounts to the video game equivalent of a 8 year old mashing two action figures together and making comical kissing noises?

We regularly get up in arms about what amounts to the video game equivalent of an 8-year-old pretending to wield a light saber, so I don't see why not?

 

[Waylon Drums]

Of course you can be neutral on gay rights, it's called not taking part. I'm not told I'm not allowed to eat at a restaurant because I'm gay, or alternatively if someone is homophobic, (I'm not saying that doesn't happen, I've seen a few threads on GAF about not serving gay couples) but these businesses will serve anyone, and that is remaining neutral. Nintendo going with 'traditional' marriage (if you pardon the phrase) is not anti-gay it's just going with they way things are, as bad as that may seem.
As for me I'm all for gay rights and gay marriage, but I'm not out on the streets protesting or campaigning in anyway, I'm like many other people - I'm not taking part so we may as well be neutral.

It really hurts me that I feel I have to play devil's advocate here because I'm also in favour of the OPs campaign and hopefully Nintendo includes it in this game or the next, But I believe some of you are just overreacting, Nintendo is not some anti-gay company with an agenda - the issue is not as clean cut as being for or against gay marriage. There are issues here that need to be discussed, and have been; mainly around the Japanese family culture, which ignores anyone not part of it and hopefully this campaign can help Nintendo change a bit (I have no idea how Nintendo, or Japanese people in general perceives western values on relationships, maybe this campaign will teach them something).

You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game. You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game. You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game. You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game. You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game. You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game. You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game. You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game. You can't remain neutral when you're including the concept of marriage in a game.


Either you include gay marriage or you don't but you've taken a stand either way. This is an easy concept to understand.

 

[Waylon Drums]

We regularly get up in arms about what amounts to the video game equivalent of an 8-year-old pretending to wield a light saber, so I don't see why not?

People are literally calling for boycotting all of Sony because of the Driveclub PS+ fiasco but this situation is apparently much less serious than that.

/derp

 

[Lizardus]

I know I am in the minority here but I am glad Nintendo isn't bowing down or pandering to a group of people just because they felt excluded by it.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

I know I am in the minority here but I am glad Nintendo isn't bowing down or pandering to a group of people just because they felt excluded by it.

Yes, thankfully ignorant opinions are in the minority

 

[BY2K]

Tomodachi Life is just a goofy game about goofy relationships, the social implications probably didn't even cross Nintendo's mind.

 

[DECK'ARD]

...

You may want to reconsider that.

 

[APF]

If a game had the ability for characters to have relationships, but there was a switch that only allowed characters with the same skin color to enter into these relationships, this would not be taking a "neutral" position on the issue of miscegenation. It would be taking the implicit stand that one type of relationship is acceptable. On the contrary, allowing anyone to enter into a relationship would be the "neutral" position because it literally takes no deliberate steps to prevent or encourage any specific type of pairing.

I know I am in the minority here but I am glad Nintendo isn't bowing down or pandering to a group of people just because they felt excluded by it.

I will take your advice and exclude your opinion from consideration.

 

[Waylon Drums]

Tomodachi Life is just a goofy game about goofy relationships, the social implications probably didn't even cross Nintendo's mind.

Which is part of the problem and has been pointed out a few dozen times before.

 

[Conan-san]

No. We're going to keep speaking up when we're overlooked and devalued. You're going to come into posts and snark about something serious that warrants actual discussion.

Look, I get the PR was a bum move, totally and that Nintendo might have been better served by acknowledging the situation better (even if Homosexual partnerships is off the table because you know some whackaday priest will get all up Nintendo's ass about that) but the SWJ nonsense that has resulted from it just makes me tired of the whole stupid thing and about Equality topics in general.

This should have ended on "Nintendo said a dumb thing about how they were handling their software"

Thing is being blown out of all proportion is all I'm saying.

 

[eXistor]

Really? We're going to get up in arms about what amounts to the video game equivalent of a 8 year old mashing two action figures together and making comical kissing noises?

I've been trying to make a post that accurately reflects my stance on the matter and this is pretty much it. Nintendo was never out to target any group. I'm all for same-sex relationships, but Tomadachi Life is not the right target for this movement.

 

[BY2K]

Which is part of the problem and has been pointed out a few dozen times before.

And now Nintendo is being seen as anti-gay by some folks and they don't deserve it.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Yeah it's pretty crazy, It seems Nintendo just wants to remain neutral in this whole debate, which is fine - as they say "[they] never intended to make any social commentary with the game". But it seems some media outlets want to take the position of neutral as 'anti-gay' or 'if you're not with us you're against us'. Even that BBC headline is pretty sensationalist: "Nintendo says 'No' to gay game characters", um no they didn't, everything Nintendo says is written in their own article and it's pretty clear they never said 'no'.

You are approaching this as though straight marriage is the default (a "neutral" position, not political), and same-sex marriage is a bonus (and a "social statement", political); that assumption of neutrality on the part of straight marriage is heteronormative and works to demean gay people by treating them as an aberration. This doesn't mean you're homophobic or hateful or you don't support marriage equality, what it means is that you have an embedded assumption in your worldview which denies gay couples the full dignity they deserve.

Similar posts in this thread include posts like "I'm for same-sex marriage, but personally I don't really want my young children to have to learn about sexuality at all", which similarly professes a shared commitment to equality but then applies a separate standard to same-sex marriage as to straight marriage. If being able to have a kid with, couple with, or marry an opposite sex character is a neutral, normal, apolitical, non-sexual statement then being able to have a kid, couple with, or marry a same-sex character is also a neutral, normal, apolitical, non-sexual statement.

 

[Fattony12000]

You are approaching this as though straight marriage is the default (a "neutral" position, not political), and same-sex marriage is a bonus (and a "social statement", political); that assumption of neutrality on the part of straight marriage is heteronormative and works to demean gay people by treating them as an aberration. This doesn't mean you're homophobic or hateful or you don't support marriage equality, what it means is that you have an embedded assumption in your worldview which denies gay couples the full dignity they deserve.

Similar posts in this thread include posts like "I'm for same-sex marriage, but personally I don't really want my young children to have to learn about sexuality at all", which similarly professes a shared commitment to equality but then applies a separate standard to stand-sex marriage as to straight marriage. If being able to have a kid with, couple with, or marry an opposite sex character is a neutral, normal, apolitical, non-sexual statement then being able to have a kid, couple with, or marry a same-sex character is also a neutral, normal, apolitical, non-sexual statement.

This.

Also...

stand-sex marriage

it-was-me-dio-joke.jpeg

 

[McNum]

And welcome to Danish Public Service, too.

Nothing new in there, but this thing is getting around fast now. Congrats! I hope Nintendo will at least think about this in their next game of this kind. It's probably too late to change Tomodachi Life but who knows for any sequels?

 

[Eidan]

This seems like a pretty simple fix for Nintendo. I don't know why they wouldn't just allow the same-sex marriages. This isn't 2004 anymore, any kind of backlash they'd face would be from a group that is openly maligned in most media.

 

[Stumpokapow]

And now Nintendo is being seen as anti-gay by some folks and they don't deserve it.

The implication of the argument isn't that Nintendo is anti-gay, although judging from all the people saying "They're not anti-gay, they just have a traditional Japanese view on the family" which is like saying "They're not anti-gay, they just have a traditional Christian view on the family" ie a rationalization of why they're anti-gay, not a refutation of the fact that they're gay.

No, the implication is that Nintendo has made a conscious choice in their game (to include gender-based heterosexual coupling activities), the impact of which demeans and devalues gay people. Whether they did that out of a lack of awareness and empathy or active malice is pretty irrelevant. Moreover, now that it has been called to their attention. hence the press, it cannot be said that their continued actions are out of a lack of awareness--rather, they have made a value judgment either about same-sex marriage ("We don't want it because it is wrong"), or about the importance of same-sex marriage ("It's not important enough to justify more programming", "It's not important enough to justify the controversy we'll get when REAL bigots get angry"). That is an active, deliberate choice. That's not staying out of the debate. They've been dragged into the debate, and now they need to choose where to stand. Rush lyrics: If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice. That's the nature of free will.

If there are people out there who are hurt enough by this, because they've lived their whole lives with constant reminders that they're less than equal, then frankly I'm not bothered if they see a relatively small or insignificant distinction between companies that do anti-gay things and companies that are anti-gay. What I'm surprised by is the fact that people think a multi-billion dollar company with a multi-million dollar PR firm and thousands of development employees is apparently paralyzed to effectively respond to the unfair tactics used by a college kid making a youtube video because he was hurt. Goliath had it hard too, why was David so mean to him?

Edit: I'd add that this is to some extent a repeat of the last Nintendo corporate social responsibility. Many posters entered and said "Wait, companies are supposed to care about social issues? Oh. Well, I bet Nintendo is doing a good job, and you can't expect them to do better overnight, conservative company, aren't other things more important, it's not like Nintendo is anti-environment they just don't take any of the positive measures people are asking for or participate in inter-company industry discussions to improve the industry's social or environmental footprint or do things that all their competitors do in this way". This is not just about Nintendo. There's context to all of this.

 

[Metallix87]

You are approaching this as though straight marriage is the default (a "neutral" position, not political), and same-sex marriage is a bonus (and a "social statement", political); that assumption of neutrality on the part of straight marriage is heteronormative and works to demean gay people by treating them as an aberration. This doesn't mean you're homophobic or hateful or you don't support marriage equality, what it means is that you have an embedded assumption in your worldview which denies gay couples the full dignity they deserve.

Similar posts in this thread include posts like "I'm for same-sex marriage, but personally I don't really want my young children to have to learn about sexuality at all", which similarly professes a shared commitment to equality but then applies a separate standard to stand-sex marriage as to straight marriage. If being able to have a kid with, couple with, or marry an opposite sex character is a neutral, normal, apolitical, non-sexual statement then being able to have a kid, couple with, or marry a same-sex character is also a neutral, normal, apolitical, non-sexual statement.

Unfortunately, the West is very heteronormative in nature. Things are changing in some ways, but I think Nintendo realizes that the crazy religious folk in this country would throw a fit over gay relationships. There's no easy answer, unfortunately. Ideally, a Tomodachi Life 2 would allow it as an option.

 

[MLH]

Which is part of the problem and has been pointed out a few dozen times before.

The part where Nintendo said they didn't intend to make a social commentary. You can't keep spouting one liners in rage over this, as I said above: "Nintendo going with 'traditional' marriage (if you pardon the phrase) is not anti-gay it's just going with they way things are, as bad as that may seem".

The issue of gay marriage is being discussed right now, in the real world, people are fighting for it with all their hearts and I fully support them, If Nintendo were to release a game with gay marriage there would be outrage, and we would still be having this debate. This is a small battle, your frustration should be aimed at the world around you - the world that still sees traditional marriage as between a man and a woman - change that and you change everything - that is the real battle and that is really worth your time.

 

[zroid]

I know I am in the minority here but I am glad Nintendo isn't bowing down or pandering to a group of people just because they felt excluded by it.

This is a really stupid comment

Thing is being blown out of all proportion is all I'm saying.

I don't think the campaign is blowing anything out of proportion, really. There certainly are INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE doing so, by screaming boycott or calling Nintendo a homophobic organization, which is simply false. I support that this campaign wants Nintendo to take a stance in the future instead of "remaining neutral" (which as has been said before, basically amounts to a negative stance in this situation).