-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
EA Joins coalition against DOMA
- Thread starter michaeltraps
- Start date
CaptainSchwann
Member
You're not fooling me EA. I know you're only doing this to win over people that hate you.
Seriously though, bravo.
Ingueferroque
Banned
Just seems like a cheap ploy to get some good publicity for once.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
People got offended because you were acting like companies should not take sides on issues that directly affect their employees and their personas, that EA should be a baby making factory that does nothing but pump out kids. The problem here is that people hate EA for being a baby factory. That's completely hypocritical.
People don't take kindly to hating against something positive just because it's done by someone negative.
EA makes bad games so of course they must hate homosexuals. That's the mentality.
It seemed like that is where your posts were coming from, and people respond negatively to that.
Speak of the devil.
Yeah they're pretty active with LGBT support with their staff:
Wow, this is an awesome photo
Delusibeta
Banned
Seconded, went "wut", clicked link, found out that we're actually talking about a US bill.
Then again, it's a pity that there is such a bill exists in the US. That's 'MURICA for ya.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
That's cool of them.
Wait, wait, wait. Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said I hate this, nor that they shouldn't side or support anything. I just simply said they should be talking about video games, and whether those are good or bad is subjective based on whomever is playing it.
I don't know where you got where I hated EA, or their games, or what they've done.
KibblesBits
Member
Does EA have a larger amount of gay and lesbian employees than other gaming companies?
Snkfanatic
Banned
Good on EA
but this comment on the link made me laugh out loud....literally
but this comment on the link made me laugh out loud....literally
Oh, yes, right, bigotry is still around.
If I were to try and consider what the 'negative' aspects of gay marriage are, or try to understand why people would even consider being an "opponent of gay relationships", I guess the only remotely plausible argument against gay marriage would be that women need men, men need women to create babies and create people -- however, lots and lots of countries are suffering because of overpopulation/too many people.
If it ever became a problem, and "men needed to impregnate the women", I don't think that would be an issue at all -- sperm banks, sperm donations, and so on.
So, that's not even a "problem" anymore, and hasn't been for decades/centuries. And that makes me wonder -- how is it possible that many people have been against gay marriage, or gay relationships, for several years, without any valid reasons? Surely they must have thought about the real reasons behind why they dislike it and why they think it's a good idea to speak to other people about it..
But most likely it's just a part of human nature; maybe someone figured out that if he/she changes their mind on the subject, they will get less attention. Or their friends might take it the wrong way. Blah blah.
If I were to try and consider what the 'negative' aspects of gay marriage are, or try to understand why people would even consider being an "opponent of gay relationships", I guess the only remotely plausible argument against gay marriage would be that women need men, men need women to create babies and create people -- however, lots and lots of countries are suffering because of overpopulation/too many people.
If it ever became a problem, and "men needed to impregnate the women", I don't think that would be an issue at all -- sperm banks, sperm donations, and so on.
So, that's not even a "problem" anymore, and hasn't been for decades/centuries. And that makes me wonder -- how is it possible that many people have been against gay marriage, or gay relationships, for several years, without any valid reasons? Surely they must have thought about the real reasons behind why they dislike it and why they think it's a good idea to speak to other people about it..
But most likely it's just a part of human nature; maybe someone figured out that if he/she changes their mind on the subject, they will get less attention. Or their friends might take it the wrong way. Blah blah.
I have no problem praising them when they do positive things like this while still not caring for the company as a whole. Like, I think it's excellent to see companies support the LGBT community, but I still don't feel like using Origin
Xion4360
Member
men and women who are gay will be gay regardless of weather or not they can or do marry. Making marriage possible wouldnt mean that less straight people are making babies. Actually having the rights afforded through marriage would only make life better for those gay couples who are starting families through adoption or whatever.
The only reason anyone has against it is because of faith, religion, the bible. The bible says it is wrong and not acceptable therefor they will be against it (despite many other things the bible says are not acceptable but they just ignore that) Religion is the only real argument, and it shouldnt be considering the separation of church and state.
They can't win.
CharmingCharlie
Member
Funnily EA didn't give a shit about everyone's rights and liberties when SOPA was doing the rounds, they supported a bill that would have impacted negatively on EVERYONE (admittedly did drop it after a huge outcry). Now they are fighting this DOMA thing is it any wonder people are coming to the conclusion that this is a "publicity" thing, it is the first thing I thought.
See, you say this, then I immediately do, and then regret it.
SOPA was a bill that directly benefited (in their view) their business, ergo their employees ability to keep their jobs.
DOMA does not allow their gay employees to receive equal treatment in regards to marriage us straights have, causing those employees, and the company, additional costs both emotional and fiscal. This is bad for business and their employees.
Completely different ballparks. Yes, it's part PR, but it's also the smart business call and shows that they're at least a little forward thinking. Give 'em a little credit.
To be honest, that sounds like a joke making fun of EA's recent bad press. I haven't read anything else on that page though, so maybe some of them are genuinely bad.
Xion4360
Member
It sounds very sarcastic to me. I cant imagine anyone honestly being THAT ignorant.
CrushDance
Banned
So what other groups of people should be omitted from mass media?
chertipros
Member
Not surprised on their stance, considering how they treat the dragon age/mass effect controversies. Still good though that they are supporting something like this
Danny Dudekisser
I paid good money for this Dynex!
Doesn't make Dead Space 3's dudebro direction any less appalling.
EA have had a pretty good track record on supporting their LGBT employees in the past, and this really isn't any different. I remember about one-and-a-half years ago they made a 'It Gets Better' video with their gay employees.
As a consumer it doesn't change how I feel about them. They treat their customers like shit, and release products which I think are not that great, but not terrible either (on the most part). However, post-ea_spouse, they've shown they look after their staff, and this move isn't surprising at all.
Whether it's in their business interests or not, I think EA probably would've supported this just because they want to be an open and welcoming place for the best talent in the games industry to go to. It's less about being a consumer-facing PR move (because many gamers, as we'll probably see as a result of this news, are gay-hating douchefucks who will hate EA for this), and more about attracting talent, regardless of sexual orientation, to their company. Also, them talking about the financial burdens this law will bring is just another argument to help them forward their case. I doubt it's a primary motivation.
I can't see any valid reason to criticise EA for this. Companies do act selfishly, but EA has rightly seen that it's in its own interests to keep their staff happy. That's about as close to altruism that a profit-focussed company will get. Good on them.
As a consumer it doesn't change how I feel about them. They treat their customers like shit, and release products which I think are not that great, but not terrible either (on the most part). However, post-ea_spouse, they've shown they look after their staff, and this move isn't surprising at all.
Whether it's in their business interests or not, I think EA probably would've supported this just because they want to be an open and welcoming place for the best talent in the games industry to go to. It's less about being a consumer-facing PR move (because many gamers, as we'll probably see as a result of this news, are gay-hating douchefucks who will hate EA for this), and more about attracting talent, regardless of sexual orientation, to their company. Also, them talking about the financial burdens this law will bring is just another argument to help them forward their case. I doubt it's a primary motivation.
I can't see any valid reason to criticise EA for this. Companies do act selfishly, but EA has rightly seen that it's in its own interests to keep their staff happy. That's about as close to altruism that a profit-focussed company will get. Good on them.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I'm not saying you said anything of this.
I'm saying that's what you sounded like, which is why you got the backlash you did.
I mean... did you not read what I wrote?
What does this have to do with anything?
Human rights are not video game funtime. The internet being controlled by Big Business is not equal to a sexual orientation being discriminated against.
I was against SOPA, but come on.
After reading this I of course did. Pretty shocking to find out there is actually a lot of bigoted gamers out there
metalslimer
Member
After reading this I of course did. Pretty shocking to find out there is actually a lot of bigoted gamers out there
I imagine you've never been on XBLA or any game with voice online
After reading this I of course did. Pretty shocking to find out there is actually a lot of bigoted gamers out there
but.. how... how can you be shocked by that?
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
CharmingCharlie
Member
SOPA would have had a huge negative impact on nearly everyone that uses the internet. I consider that to be just as important as "sexual orientation discrimination". (the fact America spends so much time worrying about who is doing what to whom boggles my mind at the best of times).
I just do not get why this is something positive from EA ? They supported SOPA because it was in their interests and now they are fighting against DOMA because it is in their interests to do so. The fact that EA now find themselves on the "good guy" side is merely coincidental.
No one is stopping you from making a FPS with a gay main character that apparently the world is waiting for.
And yes Charlie is right, this is easy P.R. that gives them what they want. Threads like this
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
How is this the same as being denied a job, being denied marriage, being denied being able to serve (safely) in the military, being denied a church, being disowned by your family and friends, pretending to be straight, living your life in misery because you fear telling people who you are?
Go on. I'm listening.
CharmingCharlie
Member
I am not getting into a moronic argument about whose rights are more important (which is what you seem to be trying to do). This is a stupid vapid attempt by EA at PR. They do not give one shit about my rights, your rights, gay rights or any other damn rights. All EA give a shit about is their bank balance.
They did the sums for SOPA and found it would be financially beneficial to support SOPA, they did the maths with DOMA and found it financially beneficial to fight it plus chuck in the "hey we are cool and fighting for gay rights" PR in there for good measure.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Okay EA I'll start buying your games now
Xion4360
Member
I dont think EA was awarded the 100% no gay discrimination or whatever award for no reason whatsoever. They have a record of being for Gay Rights and supportive of the LGBT community weather its just for PR or a well conceived company policy is beyond the point. Stop taking EVERYTHING positive or negative they do as an opportunity to try and justify your dislike for them as a company. Sometimes its a reason to do so, but not always.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Human rights are more important. Are you implying that computers are a right? How about cars?
So you're in the "EA is Hitler" camp. Gotcha.
CrushDance
Banned
That's not what he said. He said the majority of people are not gay, true. But look at what he was responding too and how that logic could be used to suit and *is used* to suit so many other ridiculous arguments.
The quote was:
Not the only option, but the default. And he/she responded by saying
And so what? Giving people the choice is not a bad thing. People shouldn't be forced into(pardon the pun), playing a certain role. Now I'm not talking in general here, things like books, movies, television, comics, etc are people trying to tell a specific story. Even most games are too. I'm not saying that every game needs to have a person choose whether they're gay or straight or anything else. But rather that in a game where it is possible for someone to choose more than one aspect of their character, they should be given the choice to truly reflect that. It's a little suffocating to say: "You can be A, B and C. But you can't be D". It's not intentional, it's not truthfully realistic to give everyone a choice about everything. But using the justification of "It's not what the majority want" is a little ridiculous. How is it any more less of an Agenda to say "Straight is the default" than to say "Gay is the default". What the majority wants isn't always what's best for everyone. Asking for representation is not an Agenda. You don't have to do it, but it would be nice to see.
Lastly I'll just say that playing as a gay character would not be something I'm terribly interested in because I can't identify easily with the subtleties and whatnot. but it would still be interesting enough of a concept nonetheless to play through it at-least once. Nobody is going to force me to buy it and play, but I'd like the choice. If you can have Shepard running around with various women in ME, I should be able to do the same with Shepard and any of the male characters. There's a difference between showing(Male/Female) and implying(FF/MM). Because otherwise it goes from "Yeah there's gay people. I have no problem with them." to "I have no problem with gay people, but I don't want to see it.". Because it's the latter that most people think to themselves and believe that they're actually fine with homosexuality, when they're really not.
It's when you can see either and just enjoy the movie, game, book, whatever and take in the message in said medium and not feel like there's some evil agenda being forced down your throat, that one can cross over the line from tolerance to acceptance.
Edit: As an aside. I don't care for EA whatsoever. I played ME2 and bailed out after that debacle.
Technically SOPA restricts the freedom to communicate so yeah it can be seen as a human right.
Also i think you are giving DOMA undue powers.
CrushDance
Banned
I know I'm not going to change your mind on the issue. But why do you feel this way? Should you not afford other people the same rights and freedoms that you ask for yourself? What makes you more worthy of living a happy and peaceful life than homosexual couples?
You said it much better than I did.
Xion4360
Member
Gay guys are just guys who like other guys sexually. If the game isnt about sex I dont care if the guy im playing is straight gay bi or whatever, its irrelevant to the game. But in a game like Mass Effect or Fable something that gives you choice and relationships are part of that, then sure makes sense to be included there.
Sure, you cant think Im some sort of abomination.. I dont care what you think of me and I dont particularly give a crap about you either. Just dont deprive me of my rights. Thats it. Funny thing is you dont even have a right to deprive me of mine. You are of course entitled to your opinion, and you could curse me to hell and back and back to hell 50 times over, but you cannot tell me I cant get married. DOMA is unconstitutional.
Sure, you cant think Im some sort of abomination.. I dont care what you think of me and I dont particularly give a crap about you either. Just dont deprive me of my rights. Thats it. Funny thing is you dont even have a right to deprive me of mine. You are of course entitled to your opinion, and you could curse me to hell and back and back to hell 50 times over, but you cannot tell me I cant get married. DOMA is unconstitutional.
And to all that, again i say no one is stopping you from making whatever the hell it is you want to play.
If you think there is a market for a version of mass effect where the guy is screwing dudes, go right ahead. It's not EA's concern. EA will do what is best for them, and if making the MC's gay is best than rock on. As far as that goes forcing characters we don't like or want to play as to teach us a lesson as you seem to imply towards the end of your post is kind of insulting.
But this attitude that we need to force these options onto publishers or developers is dumb, and personally I don't feel as if an evil dark agenda is being forced down on me because i'm not playing as a gay character in battlefield. As if I would even know.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Goodnight, everybody.
CrushDance
Banned
People always raise a major stink when a minority of any kind is placed in a leading role of any creative effort. Is that true or not? Is that a problem or not? I understand what you're saying. But again. You do not have to be gay in a game if you aren't. But you have to be straight if you aren't. And in games where sexuality plays a role, do you not think that both doors(Pardon the pun), should be open? I did not say or mean to imply anything about forcing anyone to do anything. What I did say was that we more often than not automatically force people who aren't the majority to accept a certain character or world and just "deal with it". It goes both ways. And it shouldn't be like that is all that I'm saying.
If it merits the option and is a realistic issue, than give people the choice. I hope we can both agree on that.
Please be a joke post : /
CharmingCharlie
Member
SOPA did breach human rights, such as "freedom of speech" (that used to be a big thing in America many moons ago). Now I wouldn't put the right to free speech above any gay rights because all rights are equally important. The minute you start going "these rights are more important than those rights" you get utter retardation such as the "Defence Of Marriage Act"
No I am not in the "EA is Hitler" camp and that was pretty silly thing for you to say. I am in the "EA couldn't give a rats arse about any ones rights unless it is beneficial to them" camp. They showed they didn't give a shit about peoples rights when they backed SOPA.
They are fighting against DOMA because it is in their interest to do so. They are not doing it for some bloody grand "oh we support LGBT rights" they are doing it because business wise it makes sense and hey who knows they might pick up a few brownie points along the way in the PR department after being voted Americas worst company.
Now if you want to give EA some gold stars for their stance on DOMA that is entirely up to you.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Poe's Law is in full effect here.