I dont get it either, who cares if ppl like cock, pussy or vacuum cleaners?
And who cares if someone thinks its wrong to like cock, pussy or vacuum cleaners?
Shadow Complex
Game » consists of 5 releases. Released Aug 19, 2009
Reluctant hero Jason Fleming investigates a hidden underground complex to rescue his girlfriend Claire in this Metroid-style action-adventure game.
The Shadow Complex Controversy
" @floodiastus said:Giantbomb = Card ^_^" I dont get it either, who cares if ppl like cock, pussy or vacuum cleaners? "Giantbomb does not approve such profanity! Well maybe it does, but SHHHHHH! Your profanity is profane! "
@Fallen189 said:
" AMERICA!!!!!!!! "Exactly what I was thinking hehe
Orson Card is a fucking bigot. He is an extremely flawed man with loathsome views and I despise him for hating homosexuals. So, I boycott his books (at least since Ender's game). However, that's not a very complicated matter in the case of a book, because about as much of the profit earned is going to card is going to him as is going to the publisher. In that case, he truly is earning the profit that he doesn't deserve, because even though he is a great sci-fi writer and his body of work and his personal beliefs are completely un-connected, I find it noble the idea that people would not purchase his books to prove a point to people. Like being a vegetarian and boycotting meat, boycotting proves to a person that you are standing up for what you beliefs but it doesn't mean anything because you can't stop, or even slow, somebody from producing something when their is at least somewhat of an audience out there for it, which is the case for both meat and Orson Scott Card's novels. They both still have an audience.
Analogy aside, a game is a completely different matter. The game is based in Orson Scoot Car's fiction (let me prove a point here) so I'll say he gets 5% of the profit from the game (a complete and utter guess). The point is, it's considerably less in the case of a game than his novel, and the game is a great one which has none of the bigoted views apparent in Orson Scott Card's personal life. I understand the principle of the matter in the case of both the game and a book, but what it comes down to is that a fundamental level it makes less sense with the game. The game has a loose connection to the man himself, and as flawed as he is, it can't let you stop from purchasing what appears to be the best downloadable game yet released on XBLA.
As much as I respect what people are trying to do, it's not like Card is gonna kill a homosexual for each 1000 dollars he earns. It's understandable that people wish him to not earn anything, which is why the books are boycotted by many. But in the case of a game connected to his fiction in the loosest sense, which he probably had next to none involvement in the game and which contains none of the views held by Orson himself, it doesn't make sense because it will not stop his personal views because no matter how much people bitch, it will benefit him very little, and it will detract from the profit for a bunch of great people (assumedly) who set out to make a great game and achieved in doing so.
It proves nothing because earning less profit doesn't matter to Card because all he did was probably give his signature to earn a little money, and he probably doesn't care for how much money he gets because he almost no stake in the project at all. It's not good for Chair, and they deserve better than a petty boycott against a loathsome man whose fiction just happens to be a part of their game.
Also, go check out Christian Nutt's article on Gamastra. Quite good. Has some good points and makes for a good perspective on the whole matter (he is gay himself).
" As I said in another thread, it doesn't matter, and people are being too uptight over a person's beliefs. Gay marriage is something to be decided at the state level, not the federal level, and the United States is one nation under God. That means no gay marriage, it's defined as a man and a woman, end story. I've already got an argument going on in another thread about this. Don't want to bother dragging it out over many threads. "Except in your view the world is a concrete static thing that never changes :S
But yeah...not another one haha.
" This is dumb as hell. Chances are, if you buy anything, there will have been somebody involved that has an opinion you deem to be unworthy. Best not buy anything to be on the safe side. If it's only a problem because this guy has voiced his opinion, then to me that just proves that the opposition is about how they want to be perceived, rather than any genuine moral opposition.1) Chances are certain products aren't related to people who so happen to be a big player of a certain organization or happen to give some money to a certain organization/religion. Of course with Orson Scott Card, we know that he is a big player of NOM (National Organization of Marriage) and just so happen to give a ton of money to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints/Mormons. It is a matter of principle, when you have a stand on certain issues, you don't give money to people who work against your views/life. Or rather you should not give your money to that person. Then there is clout Orson Scott Card has, because he has a large group of fans, and sometimes his opinions can influence people.
In fact, the entire idea behind 'Gaygamer' is retarded, imo. I hate it when people bitch about equality, then take every opportunity to segregate themselves and define themselves entirely by one facet of their personality, which they claim they shouldn't be judged for in the first place. If you don't want x to be an issue then stop using it to draw attention to yourself. What next? Blondegamer? Tallgamer? Jebus. "
2) And I'm tired of that argument that it segregated themselves, it's horseshit when the argument just so happens to co-exist with those who like to hide the issue (Don't deny it, you deny the existence of a problem, or rather the understanding of the people who have a problem with this situation). So many threads about this have been deleted (Not locked, deleted) which shows how this topic is designed to make gay issues invisible, and the existence of gaygamer is so that visibility is never taken away. You are missing the point.
3) I don't support a boycott, but I know there is a damn problem here when the companies who made the game are pretending this issue does not exist.
Not that I was going anywhere with that at all, not like I was making a point related to how the two groups mentioned in the previous post, spend their money to segregate people. But that's all fine, because my comment pointing this out is the true evil and that really segregates people.
No banana sticker for you.
" As much as I respect what people are trying to do, it's not like Card is gonna kill a homosexual for each 1000 dollars he earns. "You know what? I think that might be the next false rumour I try to spread. People would believe it too...
" @ververdan0226 said:It's true, I heard it on Fox News...." As much as I respect what people are trying to do, it's not like Card is gonna kill a homosexual for each 1000 dollars he earns. "You know what? I think that might be the next false rumour I try to spread. People would believe it too... "
Damn it doesn't work in this situation.
I probably wouldn't have been aware of Card's beliefs if this wasn't brought up. I'm enjoying Shadow Complex, and I don't see how a person's background should affect my enjoyment of a product. I'm curious as to what other controversial subject matters would cause a boycott. If Card was a racist or against abortion, would this change anyone's position? It wouldn't for me if it's irrelevant to the product.
We seem to agree on many points sweep, and we make similar points...our blog names are similar as well. Well shit...I think were wearing the same out fits as well. Damn.
Haha Great read though sweep
" @natetodamax said:This is technically incorrect. What actually happened is the writer who's material the game is loosely based on is homophobic, therefore reactionaries immediately decided that the appropriate course of action is to punish the entire development team that has nothing to do with outspoken homophobia for views that are not necessarily theirs by boycotting this seemingly innocuous game." I don't get it... "One of the games designers publicly speaks out against homosexuality. People don't want to buy his game. What's not to get? "
Bam.
Shabang.
I'll pay money for a quality product. If the KKK decided to sponsor Modern Warfare 2, I'm still buying the game. It's a great game. Theres no anti-gay things in Shadow Complex, so I don't see the problem. The money Orson Scott Card makes off the game is his to do what he wants with. It's America. I do't agree with the view, but it's his opinion and he's entitled to think that way if he wants to.
People like Card are holding back society. And people that think L4D2 is unjustified are also idiots. Valve can make any game they want, why would you want to hinder their freedom?
What actually happened is the writer who's material the game is loosely based on is homophobic, therefore reactionaries immediately decided that the appropriate course of action is to punish the entire development team that has nothing to do with outspoken homophobia for views that are not necessarily theirs by boycotting this seemingly innocuous game.Choosing not to buy a game doesn't punish anyone. I'm not buying adult diapers, but I am not punishing the people who make adult diapers. However, choosing to buy a game does reward someone. At that point, you have to decide whether or not you want to reward that person. The answer will be different for everyone. Some people like yourself will say this guy is only loosely involved in the game and his beliefs do not justify consideration in a purchase. Others will say that the dev team have chosen to align themselves with this individual when this game could have been made without any involvement from him whatsoever. They may feel that same dev team does not deserve to be rewarded as a result.
Here's a good question: Have the developers publicly stated that they do not agree with the author and his beliefs? Certainly they are familiar enough with him to realize he holds a somewhat controversial belief and they are intelligent enough to realize this could create controversy around the release of their game based in his universe. If, in fact, they disagree with him, I would hope their conscience would have dictated that they make the fact public before now. If, perhaps, they do agree with him and were merely concerned for the bottom line of their product, I imagine they could release a statement that the beliefs of the author do not necessarily represent their own. To the best of my knowledge, they have said nothing at this point. The silence is deafening, as the saying goes.
I will say that I bought the game before I was aware of any link to this individual. If I had known beforehand, it would have given me pause at the very least. I'm not really sure whether or not it would have affected my purchasing decision in the end. Either way, it would not have been an easy decision. I think this is probably true for anyone who is socially conscious and is concerned with civil rights. Of course, you can justify any decision, and it is impossible to step outside yourself to decide if you have a well-founded reason for purchasing or if you are simply justifying it because you want it.
In capitalism, you vote with your dollar. If you buy things, you are voting that you like the circumstances surrounding their production whether or not that is your intent. If something about a product makes you uncomfortable, you let the responsible party know by not buying it. Things don't happen in a vacuum. Products are not extricated from the factors surrounding their production once they are put on the shelves.
The whole offset the hate thing is ridiculous. Firstly I have no understanding of what a worthy gay charity is, why it would exist. Someone may like to explain it to me some time because when I think charity I think of giving the homeless another shot or feeding starving children somewhere. I also think about things like curing cancer or some other crappy disease trying to turn your money towards a positive outcome. Why exactly are we raising money for a gay charity here? Are we trying to feed them or cure them of their gayness of something? I would like to hope not and I really don't get it.
Also just the idea that a gay person, or anyone with some sort of investment in gay rights would boycott the game is futile. Is it going to change his mind? No. It is going to change the minds of the other people paying for the game? No probably not either. If anything it fuels publicity to it and probably sells more copies. I'm sorry gay community (personally I got no issues with your life style) but feeling bad for kinda liking some game with some connection to a guy who doesn't like the way you live your life is fucking stupid.
This is dumb. A guy is entitled to what he says just as much as gays are entitled to thier rights.
This is america.
I have a friend who's parents are very conservative and they won't go to movies starring outspoken liberals (Sean Penn was the only example I can remember although in all honesty it seems like most actors are quite liberal). I kind of thought that was ridiculous and boycotting this game also seems a bit ridiculous, but hey we each have to stand up for what we believe in in different ways. I am in favor of gay marriage and believe we need to push for greater equality, but I bought the game and don't feel any guilt about it. I reward developers who make great games by buying those games.
I think what Anthony Gallegos said on the Rebel FMcast, He was saying that if you knew the back story between 90% of the games you bought you'd want to boycott them too.
Check out http://www.marriageequality.org/ for an example. Another hypothetical I could think of is an organization that is trying to educate people about any number of gay rights issues, or possibly one working to educate people as a means of preventing hate crimes against homosexuals. Just some thoughts I had, as I can see several of you are probably also wondering what on earth a gay charity could exist for.
As for whether or not it's worthy of our money - personally I'd rather give money to the poor, but hey we all make decisions with our money differently (some of my decisions are admittedly wasteful and self-centered), but I think money to a gay charity would probably be a good thing, based on my own political views.
I only ask because I would be generally interested to see what these gay charities A) Did with their proceeds and B) How thats proven to be effective. I may have a different idea to other people about why a charity should exist but I am failing to see where it should for the gay community. Because educating people on how you live your life is one thing. Campaigning for people to change their minds under the guise of a charity is another. Because even though I have no objection to how people live their lives I don't necessarily see people thinking a homosexual lifestyle as bad is terribly evil either. The way I see it people are entitled to that opinion as long as it isn't used as the basis for denying someone something they would be right to expect as a human being.
I know this isn't exactly in line with the original topic, but its something that just stood out in whats been said.
" I think what Anthony Gallegos said on the Rebel FMcast, He was saying that if you knew the back story between 90% of the games you bought you'd want to boycott them too. "
Uh...what exactly was he talking about? The game makers' lifestyles'? The subject matter? Were there any particular examples he gave?
" @natetodamax said:No the man who wrote the book this game is based on speaks out about homosexuality. Its really nothing new it didnt hurt the sales of Ender's Game one bit and it wont hurt the sales of Shadow Complex either." I don't get it... "One of the games designers publicly speaks out against homosexuality. People don't want to buy his game. What's not to get? "
" @Nate: I am all for educating people on the issue if they want, thats fine. But it just stood out as weird to me why do they need peoples money to do so? I mean you can educate people through conversation and debate or whatever, whenever you want for free. You could do it through befriending people, teaching them better that way. Or with your deeds or any number other methods maybe. I don't really know because I have never sort to do it myself because I am simply no invested in it and as far as 'causes' go I'll be honest and say it's not high on my list of things to care about. Whats the money going towards to aid them to do it better? I only ask because I would be generally interested to see what these gay charities A) Did with their proceeds and B) How thats proven to be effective. I may have a different idea to other people about why a charity should exist but I am failing to see where it should for the gay community. Because educating people on how you live your life is one thing. Campaigning for people to change their minds under the guise of a charity is another. Because even though I have no objection to how people live their lives I don't necessarily see people thinking a homosexual lifestyle as bad is terribly evil either. The way I see it people are entitled to that opinion as long as it isn't used as the basis for denying someone something they would be right to expect as a human being. I know this isn't exactly in line with the original topic, but its something that just stood out in whats been said. "
Just quoting this one for excellence. Critical thinking in action, people. It's a good thing.
I don't care what the dude's beliefs are. I don't even care if the entire dev team thinks like him, if the game is good, and I know I'll have fun playing it, I'm buying it. People are allowed to think differently, I guarantee that more than half of the stuff, virtual or physical, you spend money on, involves someone who you wouldn't agree with.
Saying things like, "We all support people we might not want to, without knowing it." Is, kind of, burying your head in the sand. In this one case you know and in this one case you can make a small difference. If he the things Card has said and done bother you, and the idea of Chair collaborating with him doesn't sit right, then all you can do is speak with your wallet.
Otherwise, don't worry about it and enjoy the game.
The problem with threads like this is that, in the end, you will never get a group of individuals in an Internet discussion to agree on things. Whether you believe one way or another, it's best just to gloss over it to save yourself the rage.
I've been reading over all the comments in this thread and wanted to touch on a few things :
- I believe what Card was referring to when he made the statement about "gay marriage destroying democracy" was that there are far more people in this country that oppose gay marriage than there are people who are for it and if it were to be made a law then it would be against the majority of American's wishes.
- To assume that he "hates" homosexual people simply because he does not agree with homosexuality is not right,I know someone who's best friend is homosexual but yet this person has made it completely clear that she does not agree with his lifestyle,and he understands,and they have been best friends for over 20 years.I don't agree with obesity,but I don't hate overweight people either.
- This guy really made laugh because he calls the other guy "insensitive" right before calling him a "webtard",I lol'ed,hard.
- People are such pussies nowadays,always worried about "offending" somebody,quit being such whiny bitches all the time.
- People always act so holier than thou,like they've never said something derogatory about another human being,at some point everyone has said something negative about another person,that's called being human.You can't always label someone a homophobe,racist,etc.,just because of one view or opinion,it's just not always that cut and dry.
- As for the guy that made the comment about groups of people who holler about "equality" and then do there best to seperate themselves,and used gaygamer.com as an example, I'm thinking of starting a website called "straightwhitemalegamer.com",it's gonna be the shit,we'll be the most hated website on the web : )
Democracy--especially our representative democracy--is not some attempt to to satisfy the wants of a majority of the people. That is an oversimplification of the ideals behind democracy not the implementation of it. That system is called Utilitarianism. Under that system, if a majority of the people wanted blacks, whites, Christians, atheists, muslims, brown-eyes, or people with long toenails not to have equal rights, it would be so. We do not live under that system. Sometimes it is fortunate, sometimes it is not. Equal rights is one instance it is wonderful that we don't have a system such as this. The majority of the majority will either not care or will actively want to maintain their superior position by holding down the minorities.
In a representative democracy, citizens have the opportunity to select their decision-makers by voting. They cannot decide that a group based on some differentiating factor does not have the same rights as another.
Also, it is never a state government's right to deny a group their rights. The Constitution has an amendment that addresses this specifically called the Equal Protection Clause.
Please Log In to post.
This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:
Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.Comment and Save
Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.
Log in to comment