-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Possibly Manufactured Anti-Gay Campaign Targets EA Over LGBT Characters.
- Thread starter BY2K
- Start date
Man you really go out of your way to defend EA a lot. If I'm one end of the spectrum on EA then you're my polar opposite.
edit: On topic of the new information, this does not surprise me at all if it's true. I put nothing past EA's evil anymore, I've learned from experience. It's also why I refrained from commenting on this actual issue until now.
TruePrime said:
Yes that is what is being suggested. They need some good publicity after being called the worst company in America on a poll that they said they didn't care about
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
No argument there.
Regardless of what they would want, I'm just asking if that is what people are saying is happening now.
It's obvious EA will allow Bioware to do gay relationships, I'm just wondering about the Protest being manufactured.
I H8 Memes
Member
Ethical behavior is beneficial to mankind's continued growth and prosperity. Thankfully, you can behave in an ethical fashion without subscribing to fundamentalist Christian prejudices against people based on their sexual orientation.
There's no diplomatic way to put this, so I'll be blunt:
Bullshit.
You're either being willfully ignorant, or deliberately trying to reframe the debate to put your viewpoint in a better light. ('If we're intolerant, then so are you!') I've seen entirely too much of that, and that shit doesn't fly with me. Either way, let me spell out things out for you in a way that's as clear and unambiguous as possible.
Subjecting another human being to abuse (be it mental or physical) because of their sexual orientation, whether it's because it happens to squick you personally or because the faith you adhere to says it's 'wrong', is intolerance. And it's indefensible. Period.
Sexual orientation is a personal matter. Despite what you blatantly implied above, it has zero bearing on a person's ethics or lack thereof. The sheer number of unethical, immoral and downright depraved acts perpetrated by people who are not only heterosexual but claim to be devoutly religious proves that neither of those things has any bearing on how decent a human being someone else is.
On the other hand, speaking out against people who are engaging in discriminatory behavior isn't the wrong thing to do. It's not intolerant to speak out against someone else when they're engaging in abusive behavior against a particular group for no good reason. And letting people know how 'abnormal' or 'unhealthy' you feel their sexual orientation is, whether it's because said orientation is personally offensive to you, because your religion tells you so (or both), qualifies as the latter.
I strongly believe in right and wrong.
You, and those who think like you, are wrong.
Man you really go out of your way to defend EA a lot. If I'm one end of the spectrum on EA then you're my polar opposite.
edit: On topic of the new information, this does not surprise me at all if it's true. I put nothing past EA's evil anymore, I've learned from experience. It's also why I refrained from commenting on this actual issue until now.
Yes that is what is being suggested. They need some good publicity after being called the worst company in America on a poll that they said they didn't care about
Thank you kind sir.
Very weird and honestly kinda shocking they would be stupid enough to think that it wouldn't come out if they did actually do this.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
You would be right if being gay was a choice that was ipso facto harmful to yourself or to others.
It's not.
It's biology. And there's nothing wrong about being born some way. Being gay is not a birth defect.
You are attributing the terms "right" and "wrong" like they actually mean something other than opinion.
I thought you guys were supposed to hate moral relativism. How does "you can't tell us not to tell you not to do something" jive with that?
You are free to say what you want to say about homosexuality.
But others are also free to point out that you're a bigot. You have no authority to say what others can or can't say when you can't even follow the same rule and shut your god damned mouth about things you have no business butting in. Homosexuality does not affect your life.
I thought you were just kidding about "Olivia from Bolivia", but holy shit. "Theodore from Singapore" is another gem.
If this really does end up being manufactured, for fuck's sake, EA. Advocating a certain position really only loses a lot of its legitimacy for the person (or corporation in this case) involved when you have to manufacture a crisis.
What does sexual orientation have anything to do with morality? Please elaborate with facts as to why gayness is going to lead to the degradation of our society. Please also state your credentials that give you the right to judge others so fervently.
Angelus Errare
Banned
There is same sex relations in SW:ToR now?
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Yay, we got the inevitable guy playing the card of "I'm not a bigot I don't hate gay people I just believe in right and wrong!"
The sad thing is, at this point it's likely a lot of social conservatives and people who still haven't grasped the Gay Thing are honestly telling themselves this to justify their feelings. In that sense, they're trying to be sincere.
But replace "gay" with woman, latino, or black, and the "I'm not a bigot!" defense looks nonsensical.
"I'm not a bigot! I don't hate women I just believe in right and wrong!"
So... you can be wrong to be a woman?
"Well... well no, being a woman is just what a female person is! Being a gender isn't a matter of right or wrong."
Then... how can you be wrong by being gay?
"That's totally different!"
How?
"IT IS! I KNOW WHAT'S RIGHT!"
Come on. Say it. We know you want to. It's the only thing you have to fall back on.
"BEING GAY IS AN EVIL CHOICE TO BE EVIL AND WICKED!"
Which what is really behind this line of thinking. It's why conservatives are instructed via talking points to always phrase being gay as a behavior, an activity, a lifestyle someone chooses to adopt in the same way one chooses to buy Chevys instead of Fords.
If they admit that being gay is like race or gender, or green eyes, or brown hair, then you cannot say being gay is wrong without being a bigot, in the same way you cannot say black people are evil without being a bigot. Or that women are inferior without being a bigot.
So what it really comes down to is something pretty simple. The refusal to consider that being gay is an intrinsic human quality. This is how objectification works, after all. Gay people are objectified as "deviant social criminals" instead of human beings. It's easy to disapprove, and despise, and hate "criminals" and people who "choose to do bad things" while believing you're not a bigot.
The sad thing is, at this point it's likely a lot of social conservatives and people who still haven't grasped the Gay Thing are honestly telling themselves this to justify their feelings. In that sense, they're trying to be sincere.
But replace "gay" with woman, latino, or black, and the "I'm not a bigot!" defense looks nonsensical.
"I'm not a bigot! I don't hate women I just believe in right and wrong!"
So... you can be wrong to be a woman?
"Well... well no, being a woman is just what a female person is! Being a gender isn't a matter of right or wrong."
Then... how can you be wrong by being gay?
"That's totally different!"
How?
"IT IS! I KNOW WHAT'S RIGHT!"
Come on. Say it. We know you want to. It's the only thing you have to fall back on.
"BEING GAY IS AN EVIL CHOICE TO BE EVIL AND WICKED!"
Which what is really behind this line of thinking. It's why conservatives are instructed via talking points to always phrase being gay as a behavior, an activity, a lifestyle someone chooses to adopt in the same way one chooses to buy Chevys instead of Fords.
If they admit that being gay is like race or gender, or green eyes, or brown hair, then you cannot say being gay is wrong without being a bigot, in the same way you cannot say black people are evil without being a bigot. Or that women are inferior without being a bigot.
So what it really comes down to is something pretty simple. The refusal to consider that being gay is an intrinsic human quality. This is how objectification works, after all. Gay people are objectified as "deviant social criminals" instead of human beings. It's easy to disapprove, and despise, and hate "criminals" and people who "choose to do bad things" while believing you're not a bigot.
No, not yet. That's something they are planning on adding once they release new large story content.
When I was in high school, I wanted to become a journalist. I didn't want to be an anchorman or a TV personality, I wanted to have my own column in a newspaper or a magazine, where I can express my views on how the world should be.
The world should be full of love, not hate.
People should help others and lend a hand out of altruism, not to get something in return.
People should be allowed to believe in whatever they want to believe in.
People should be able to practice those beliefs in any way they wish, unless it happens to be infringing on another person's own beliefs.
People should be compassionate. People shouldn't set out to hurt others.
People should appreciate nature and all living things.
The game of life is a game we only get to play once. Make it count. Don't spend the whole thing trying to hurt the lives of others. Don't spend the whole thing trying to "convert" people to your belief system. Life is special because it is unique.
Those are my beliefs. I believe in being the most helpful person I can be. I believe in helping others no matter what. I believe that all life is special and deserves a chance at life, but I also believe in the forces of nature and the need to survive. I believe we are all unique, and no one is better than anyone else. Although, that does not stop my ambition and does not stop me from trying my hardest at everything I can.
Before I took the dive into Journalism, I realized something enlightening - the point of getting into Journalism contradicted the very fabric of my beliefs. I wanted people to stop pushing their beliefs onto others, yet that is exactly what I hoped to do.
I do not hate people who hate homosexuality. I do not hate people who hate Atheists, who hate religious followers, or people who hate a certain race. I feel sorry for them. They are stuck exactly where I was for such a long time. They are stuck trying to change the world. And many people legitimately believe that their views are better for humanity. Many people legitimately believe that they are on the right path. I understand - I was one of them. But what you have to inevitably realize, is that your life is yours to live, and that's it. No one has the right to tell another life form how to live its life. No one is so all-knowing that they can properly decipher what is best for the world.
Live your own life, and let others live theirs.
The world should be full of love, not hate.
People should help others and lend a hand out of altruism, not to get something in return.
People should be allowed to believe in whatever they want to believe in.
People should be able to practice those beliefs in any way they wish, unless it happens to be infringing on another person's own beliefs.
People should be compassionate. People shouldn't set out to hurt others.
People should appreciate nature and all living things.
The game of life is a game we only get to play once. Make it count. Don't spend the whole thing trying to hurt the lives of others. Don't spend the whole thing trying to "convert" people to your belief system. Life is special because it is unique.
Those are my beliefs. I believe in being the most helpful person I can be. I believe in helping others no matter what. I believe that all life is special and deserves a chance at life, but I also believe in the forces of nature and the need to survive. I believe we are all unique, and no one is better than anyone else. Although, that does not stop my ambition and does not stop me from trying my hardest at everything I can.
Before I took the dive into Journalism, I realized something enlightening - the point of getting into Journalism contradicted the very fabric of my beliefs. I wanted people to stop pushing their beliefs onto others, yet that is exactly what I hoped to do.
I do not hate people who hate homosexuality. I do not hate people who hate Atheists, who hate religious followers, or people who hate a certain race. I feel sorry for them. They are stuck exactly where I was for such a long time. They are stuck trying to change the world. And many people legitimately believe that their views are better for humanity. Many people legitimately believe that they are on the right path. I understand - I was one of them. But what you have to inevitably realize, is that your life is yours to live, and that's it. No one has the right to tell another life form how to live its life. No one is so all-knowing that they can properly decipher what is best for the world.
Live your own life, and let others live theirs.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I was on a forum once (it was Roosterteeth) where someone actually used this on another user. We replaced "gay" with "black", and they got all confused.
Another gem:
"Don't talk about gays to me! I'm homophobic!"
UncleSporky
Member
Eh, not necessarily. I hate it when popcorn kernel junk gets stuck between my teeth but I'm not actively trying to stop the sale of popcorn.
A lot of people can passively hate things and be really chill about it.
There are just as many homophobic liberals. This isn't about political persuasion. It's about ignorance.
That said, I see no reason to sympathize with EA. They didn't make the game. And as I pointed out earlier, all their statement does is cordon off LGBT content within the "safe" zone of the M rating. That's only slightly less homophobic than what the letter writers are saying.
To borrow Kaijima's trick, imagine if EA had said the following:
"You can't get mad at us for including black characters. We have a content advisory label that warns gamers about mature content." It's still ignorant nonsense.
MrNyarlathotep
Banned
quinntendopower
Banned
what the fuck are you talking about lol
you need to re-adjust your humor sensor, or purchase a used one. it was a JOKE for fucks sake man!
BibiMaghoo
Member
I don't at all understand the concept of this being engineered....
EA setup bots to sign a petition thanking them for including lgbt relationships in games when:
1) They did not make the game
2) They shoudn't be thanked for doing the right / normal / descent thing to do
3) They had already done it before any bot or people signed petition existed
The whole thing sounds completely laughable, and frankly stinks of the 'lets hate on EA' crowd. The same crowd that voted a video game publisher the worst company in America, because they do not agree with online passes, or how their favorite game series ended.
Am I missing something?
Or are some people just that pathetic?
Please can someone explain this?
EA setup bots to sign a petition thanking them for including lgbt relationships in games when:
1) They did not make the game
2) They shoudn't be thanked for doing the right / normal / descent thing to do
3) They had already done it before any bot or people signed petition existed
The whole thing sounds completely laughable, and frankly stinks of the 'lets hate on EA' crowd. The same crowd that voted a video game publisher the worst company in America, because they do not agree with online passes, or how their favorite game series ended.
Am I missing something?
Or are some people just that pathetic?
Please can someone explain this?
Bioware is owned by EA, so really the game is under EA and will be considered by many to be EA's game regardless of individual dev team.
Yes, many of the relationships are with aliens that we can't technically classify as a male or female in terms of human anatomy. However there are clearly defined gender roles, usually emphasized by tone of voice, body build, hair styles, etc etc. Asari are clearly feminine while all Turians in ME are definitely masculine(though there are supposedly female Turians as well). Also, there are many human characters of the same sex that you can romance.
BibiMaghoo
Member
I am aware of that, but it does not explain why this is directed at the publisher and not the developer.
When did a games possitives and negatives start to be the sole responsability of the publisher instead of the dev? It makes no sense at all. People can see it that way, but it does not make it accurate or correct.
Blaming the publisher has been around for along time.
This is really nothing new, also a dev has to answer to the publisher with the type of content they are going to use, and the type of game they are going to make.
Doesn't mean the quality will be good or bad, but EA does sign off on the games and content that are going to be released under their label.
ScrabbleDude
Member
"Dear Electronic Arts"
"it's a great thing that EA is doing for our community"
"with a little help from Yoda and you, EA"
"Keep up the good work EA!"
"EA are changing the face of the game industry"
"EA is a wonderful company!"
"Electronic Arts is fighting with us"
That's a lot of specific repeated comments mentioning the name of the company and how great they are. I don't think a random group that isn't EA or paid by EA is going to make sure great comments specifically about EA are in there.
letsbereasonable
Member
This. The Dante's Inferno fiasco makes this whole scenario completely plausible.
BibiMaghoo
Member
I agree that is true in a sense. But unless EA insisted to Bioware that they include the content, instead of them simply agreeing to it, then it is still a bit whack. The developer created that content, for good or ill.
Its like me thanking a restaurant owner for my meal, instead of the waiter or chef.
Edit@ Scrabbledude. But it was / is after the fact. It is, as I understand it, a needless thank you for something already done. What difference does that make to anyone? Does it help or hinder the public image of a publisher in the real world? I do not agree it does. These are not people running for government, they are a games publisher.
One part of me is pissed you got banned, because I want to keep this going.
On the other, no.
ScrabbleDude
Member
Depends on what you consider the real world. EA is not trying to improve their image with consumers -- they don't care about consumers or what consumers think. Most people would not stop buying their games regardless because they don't even know what EA is. They are trying to improve their image to investors and potential investors. They are not in government, but they are a publicly traded company and investor perception is extremely important.
BibiMaghoo
Member
Investors care about money, not public perception. They care about outgoings and profit margins, not that some people do not like them as a company. As you say, most people do not even know who EA really are and just buy the games. That is surely all that investors care about, that they buy the games and that they get a good return from money spent making them.
Investor perception is based on money, not the image of the company to what is a minority of people that buy the products anyway. Otherwise no one would invest in oil companies, probably the sector with the worst public image in the world.
That would be my take on it anyway. This all just seems really bizzare to me.
Makes me remember that quote about EA having something like 500 viral marketers that do nothing but shit like this all day every day across the internet.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Dear Electronic Arts, it's a great thing that you are doing for the community with a little help from Yoda. Keep up the good work. You are changing the face of the industry. You are a wonderful company and you are fighting with us. I want you inside of me, EA. All of you.
I see absolutely no evidence that EA is behind those poll shenani--okay, the joke's worn thin now, I'll stop.
On-topic, of course EA would do this. They've done it before. Utterly shameless, just like that INFLAMES asshole who got banned in this thread. People like him I pity, but entities like EA I hate.
On-topic, of course EA would do this. They've done it before. Utterly shameless, just like that INFLAMES asshole who got banned in this thread. People like him I pity, but entities like EA I hate.
It's not a matter of accepting, some people criticize this kind of thing because they believe it to be of bad taste in a T-rated videogame, and I agree.
WiiredShawn
Member
Do you mean that being gay is "bad taste" for 13-year-olds, but totally cool for 17+? Or that T-rated games are probably not capable of handling gay relationships in anything other than "bad taste," hence their 'acceptable' exclusion? I'm just curious.
Do you consider gay teens themselves to be 'in bad taste', too?
If not, then why shouldn't there be characters in games that reflect their sexual orientation?
I H8 Memes
Member
Quadrangulum
Banned
Haha. Chad from Chad and Roman from Romania.
On a more serious note, I would find it offensively distasteful if they're actually trying to dragoon the struggle for LGBT equality into a viral marketing campaign for their cheap games. It's hard to believe they'd go so far. Even if you're depraved enough to conceptualize such a strategy, surely the risk of getting caught negates any possible benefit, especially if you've been caught doing this previously.
On a more serious note, I would find it offensively distasteful if they're actually trying to dragoon the struggle for LGBT equality into a viral marketing campaign for their cheap games. It's hard to believe they'd go so far. Even if you're depraved enough to conceptualize such a strategy, surely the risk of getting caught negates any possible benefit, especially if you've been caught doing this previously.
My point was not about being gay, it was about handling sexual relationships in such interactive way, considering the fourth wall is thinner for 13-year-olds and their own character is still in development.
It's not like the rating matters for most parents anyway, but for those that do take them into consideration and/or educate their children about mature themes early, it is bad taste indeed IMO. And I mean it in a general way, since SWTOR already has ''sex'' and handles ''mature'' themes poorly like torture, slavery, promiscuity, xenophobia and racism.
Gay teens are not in bad taste at all, it's normal to feel attracted to people of same or opposite sex at that age, I just don't think they should have this kind of interaction with sexual content, specially when it is poorly written like every romance in Bioware games.
Neither (see above).
I H8 Memes
Member
Do you think that PG-13 rated movies should also not show relationships of any kind of sexual nature as well? Or even making out, since that's all you get in a Mass Effect game.
The problem with this kind of statement is that it's all-too-common to conflate "gay" with "sex." And oftentimes, criticizing an entertainment product for its "sexual content" is just thinly disguised homophobia. Being gay has no more to do with sex than being a woman does or being Russian does.
When you say "this kind of thing," it sounds an awful lot like you're being euphemistic. You save yourself a few posts later when you clarify that you meant "sex." But I hope you can see the potential issue. The letter to EA isn't criticizing the game for sexual content but for "LGBT content." That's a very different thing. And I find it just as troubling that EA's defense is to claim that they have a content warning on the game. EA is performing the same ugly conflation.