Idk, like, the upcoming Dragon Age game? I heard it's written or directed by some transgender person, and those people usually make the idea of pushing their agenda on others a #1 priority. I watched the trailer. It seemed weird to me. It doesn't feel like the game was made for everyone to enjoy. It's as if the trailer is saying: "Either you embrace our ideas and go along with this level of [insert a non-offensive term for gay stuff], or see yourself out please." Well, I'm out.Could you give me examples of an "inclusive" game you won't buy nor "free 99" it? Like what games? Deathloop? Alan Wake 2? Mortal Kombat 1?
i care because includsive games are crud nort made by REAL developsersNo, but that also includes me not really caring either way.
Just talking about the game's content itself. I don't think DEI initiatives are as big of a boogie-man as many of you do but it can be problematic for sure, but if a game is good, I don't care if the game changes "male / female" to "type1 / type2." If that ruins a game for you, I don't know what to say loli care because includsive games are crud nort made by REAL developsers
That is a dishonest statement. The Type1/Type2 is simply the outward signs that the game is crap, not the reason that it is crap. We are simply saving money by not having to purchase a game first to know when not to buy something.Just talking about the game's content itself. I don't think DEI initiatives are as big of a boogie-man as many of you do but it can be problematic for sure, but if a game is good, I don't care if the game changes "male / female" to "type1 / type2." If that ruins a game for you, I don't know what to say lol
They cant do that though because if they try to make a new IP (game, movie or tv show), it'll likely super flop because nobody sane person would watch a new piece of content with tons of preachy DEI stuff jammed in your face.I actually don't care if the main character is black, a woman, or any other shite. All of this stuff has existed in games, movies, and tv shows for years. What I do have a problem with, is taking an already established franchise and using it to push your bullshit. If you want to push shit, just make a new product. Don't shoehorn it all into something and change it for the worse. It's like if the next Elder Scrolls turned out to be "the gayest Elder Scrolls yet!" with a fortnite colour palette and art style. Then you just know this shit has been infiltrated.
Like, I love Tyler Perry movies
If you implant a quota system you are not hiring the best people for you, at best you will get the best people in that quota. If you are not using a meritocratic system you will get mediocre people soon when this practice is extended to your competitorsSure,but where's the proof of that?
If you are in a position of power, then you could choose how many people will be accounted for in a quota system.
That is a dishonest statement. The Type1/Type2 is simply the outward signs that the game is crap, not the reason that it is crap. We are simply saving money by not having to purchase a game first to know when not to buy something.
Like, if someone has outward signs of having the Plague, you can't tell us we need to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are perfectly healthy. When the game told us what kind of game it is trying to be, we then know whether it is the kind of game we want to pay for.
If you look like you have the Plague, i am going to treat you like you have the plague. No need to tell me it is just fake makeup.
The thing with Virtual Signaling, is that it is a signal you can't hide. You signal to tell us about yourself, and the rest of us will react according to which group we are in. And if it just happened that the signal leads to the game not selling, that is the fault of the signal and NOT the customer.
You are never going to shame people into buying your product. Okay, that's not true, i know of women who were forced to read the Twilight series purely so they can stay in the in group of their friends. They had to buy Twilight books because they feel ashamed if they didn't do what all her friends do. Guess what; that doesn't work for gamers.
So 30 voted yes... We have our Reeeeee infiltrators
Assuming if you were the person implementing a quota system, you still have to screen people based on standards. A quotas system is just guaranteed placement for a selected few.If you implant a quota system you are not hiring the best people for you, at best you will get the best people in that quota. If you are not using a meritocratic system you will get mediocre people soon when this practice is extended to your competitors
Now what do you think The 20's would say?
I am not going to get in a "war" with you over this. I see it as pointless. If a creator is organically creating something new that keeps inclusivity in mind, that's great and I don't think you will see many complaining about those games but of course, given today's climate, with the whole culture war going on, almost anything can become a target (deserving or not) but that will die down.How do you know thats not what they want?
Since its so obvious why dont you give me some examples of games where someone forced game devs to put a dyke or whatever in game.
That's the thing, sexual orientation is invisible 99% of the time unless its broadcast through coded language/costuming. So you see that shaved side of head haircut, the colored hair, the potato sack body shape, that cocked hip stance, all stuff that's basically the new "earring in the right ear only" or colored bandana in the back pocket. And if actual appeal to LGBT was all that mattered, this coded design would suffice.Isn't it weird that LGBT characters need to express that they are, like we (player) need to know their sexual orientation, but do we even know for any other character in the past anything about that? like what does Sonic like? is Mario bi? yes? no? no one cared
A female lead is NOT the issue, so long as she promises to NOT preach at the male audience."Inclusivity is very very important.. everyone should have a chance to see thenselfs represented in games, thats why we made this game with a woman lead, so girls everywhere can feel represented and this is a special and key point for us"
90% of the market (man) dont buy your game ... game fails miserable
"Why all the bigots and misogynistic incels didnt buy our game ? Why they care if they are playing as a woman? Who you play as is not important! Thats just absurd"
Modern Inclusive logic of the woke retarded devs and its even more retarded defenders for you.
Bro, they literally just came out with that Zelda game where you play as Zelda because certain people wouldn’t stop complaining about not being able to play as her. Perfect example of forced inclusion.Did ANY Nintendo games care about Inclusion?
No, and this is because Nintendo games is about gameplay. Everything else is just cosmetic.
And what did that get Nintendo? Games that sell, no matter how much the company annoy us in a myriad of other ways. Because gameplay is king.
"But how about having Gameplay AND inclusion"?
But that is never what we get, do we? We never get both. Because one has to be the priority, because making games is hard. So hard, that if you don't focus on Gameplay then your game fails. You don't have the luxury to divert a studio's attention away from making the funnest game they can make, because even in the best of times it is a flip of a coin if your game even makes money.
Game studios never had the luxury to take the eyes away from the ball, and "Inclusivity" is one such way to drop the damn ball.
I'm not sure if BlackRock has a significant amount of Nintendo shares, but Nintendo games aren't narrative-heavy (like Sony/Microsoft ones).Bro, they are literally just came out with that Zelda game where you play as Zelda because certain people wouldn’t stop complaining about not being able to play as her. Perfect example of forced inclusion.
It is very important to me
On a scale of 1 to 10 it's at 0 for me.
And I 100 percent agree with you op.
One of the biggest forced inclusion is Abby from last of us 2.
Are there big strong muscular man looking girl in the world ??? Yes
But does it fit in the story I don't think so it takes u away from the experience that it's not realistic
Disagree. I'm 100% against forced messaging/inclusion and even I thought it would be tight to get a Zelda game where you play as Zelda. It isn't forced inclusion and they didn't invent female link, Zelda is a long standing character and I'm glad she got her own game. To me inclusion isn't important, but having cool characters is and Zelda is a cool cat. Link will be back next game, he needed a break. Might as well say Elden Ring is woke because it has type a type b body.Bro, they literally just came out with that Zelda game where you play as Zelda because certain people wouldn’t stop complaining about not being able to play as her. Perfect example of forced inclusion.
I’m not putting evil on anyone…it’s a discussion about inclusion and the poster I replied to acted like Nintendo never did it in…and I quote, “ANY” game.Disagree. I'm 100% against forced messaging/inclusion and even I thought it would be tight to get a Zelda game where you play as Zelda. It isn't forced inclusion and they didn't invent female link, Zelda is a long standing character and I'm glad she got her own game. To me inclusion isn't important, but having cool characters is and Zelda is a cool cat. Link will be back next game, he needed a break. Might as well say Elden Ring is woke because it has type a type b body.
Why Nintendo created that game shall forever remain a mystery, but I doubt, "people wouldn’t stop complaining" affects Nintendo, otherwise they would have implemented many more of my ideas long ago.
Don't put that evil on Nintendo.