Nintendo Promises Future Tomodachi Games Will Be More "Inclusive"

I think it's silly to expect a company that can't even do internet right to be progressive.

Since you are writing intelligently and responding sensibly, I'm going to aim this towards you as an explanation of why your argument is the exact opposite of what that line meant in the original statement. I am however doing this explain better the problems with the argument itself and it isn't about you specifically (I just think you will likely challenge me in a well-thought out way).

The argument does not work as it ignores the reason the #MiiQuality campaign was started. Tomodatchi Life is a very niche game, and the localisation itself was a surprising step in that doing so would mean publishing a game where the sales gained by localising it would be very close to the cost of the localisation. This is important, remember that.

It also ignores the fact that Nintendo has to make a statement responding to those at the heart of the campaign without implying anything towards the groups of people who don't care/will buy the game regardless/won't buy the game were same sex marriage involved.

The original point of the campaign was this:

Aim: To point out to Nintendo that the creation of the game with the inclusion of Marriages but not Same-Sex Marriages was heteronormative and not okay.

The original statement isn't saying "here's the reason we aren't going to put it in" pointing out how heteronormative it was. It is saying the opposite it is saying "here's the thought process we made, we simply made the mistake of not realising the implication because we didn't think about it".

The only reason they couldn't literally say this in that specific way is because doing so would require implying things to those who already bought the game/are going to buy the game regardless, about the possibility that actually the creators are for same-sex-marriage. They cannot say this for the risk of forcing the issue on those that haven't bought it. They have bought it without ever thinking about that since it wasn't a part of the game they bought - saying so would change their perception of the game in its current form.

However, this is all only an issue because of one reason: they cannot afford to implement the change. It was obvious to the people who started the campaign that for financial reasons, in relation to the size of the possible audience of the localisation, it was incredibly unlikely for them to implement a change (it would push the project too close to having a loss, and it would require taking a development team off of their current work onto changing this).

That is why the comment is written the way it is. You just have to read it from the viewpoint of Nintendo and the people at the forefront of the campaign. The issue that has arisen is from people reading it from the perspective of themselves and not the game. They are ignoring the logistics and, in turn, ignoring the ultimate message of the first statement.

I apologise if this comes off from me as saying: "those that don't get it aren't real fans". My argument isn't that. My argument is that everyone makes mistakes including Nintendo (who's statement could have been improved, though it was sufficient), the people pushing the campaign (not explaining it correctly and putting emphasis on the message), the media and journalists (who read the original statement without the perspective of understanding the campaign and the situation of the game correctly) and the people who were, therefore, shown the story without the proper context (i.e. they based their reaction on limited information). Everyone is to blame for something, including me (who didn't actually comment about this topic despite being following the campaign since the very start because I believed the view-point I had was being well-versed by others, and only today have I come to the conclusion that it evidently wasn't).

@shmoodow said:

I agree. I think it's important for people to express their interest in seeing change, especially when business is involved. You have to make it known that there is a market waiting to be served. I just think that some people on both sides get stuck in a feedback loop in which they immediately take offense at what they think someone said rather than what was actually said, which then escalates the situation. You can see it happen a lot throughout these threads. It's straw men all the way down.

Many people need to learn to stop for a moment, take a step back, and ask themselves whether there might be a more charitable way to interpret a statement. If there is two-way communication, one should attempt to determine if one's perception of another's position is accurate before attacking said position. It is always a useful process. You either feel relieved that they didn't mean what you thought they meant... or you give them plenty of rope with which to hang themselves.

I must be missing all the gross comments being deleted by the moderators, which I don't doubt is happening. However, I wouldn't label this thread gross. Even some of the arguments that contain fallacies aren't gross, they just don't have a point.

just posted this over @joystiq :P, why not go multiplat? my 2 cents about this:

This game has great potential. The trailer was genius. The timing is right...Not including same sex relationships is a disappointment though. This game was presented in such a confident and funny way. It really nailed the zeitgeist and Nintendo really wowed me with how cleverly they marketed this one. It´s a risk to port it to the west too. It can only become a huge hit or a huge flop. Imo there´s nothing in between. Nintendo could have wiped off a lot of that tiresome "Nintendo are so backwards, so outdated" bullshit going on on the internets for quite some time now by shipping this weird game, having same sex relationships in it and let the players go crazy with this sim. They have missed a great opportunity here. Gamewise and imagewise. This is no drama, not an unexcusable scandal that can never be forgiven - but it is a missed opportunity to really show off big time that Nintendo are still there, innovating going that extra mile...

This whole comment section makes me want to drink heavily.

We can chew bubble gum, rub our stomachs, and walk at the same time. What I mean by that is that people can have feeling about not having same-sex relationships in the game while continuing to be upset by some states not allowing it. Our country is moving in the direction of allowing same-sex marriage everywhere, so I can understand why people would like to see that in any media they enjoy. That said, they ignore that not all cultures are moving in that direction.

Edit: I just want to add that this is regarding "The issues that matter."

@defaultprophet: yup. you know me, and I know you.

@suicrat: Well said.

The first statement was sufficient. I was all for the #MiiQuality campaign from the start when those that liked the series wanted to bring it to Nintendo's attention. Every one of those sane people knew that changing the game at that point for the localisation was basically impossible. No one should have expected anything changing, and the majority of them were happy with the first statement. Too bad idiots who didn't actually understand the campaign in relation this game have completely missed the point. The fact that Nintendo had to further reiterate on what they said - basically spelling out what the first statement clearly said (just written in a way so as not push on the values of any one of their Tomodachi fans) - is attrocious. And I am deeply appalled that you, @patrickklepek, have also fallen foul of it. I respect you a lot but damn have you missed the point.

@goldrock: Pretty sure the word you're looking for is empathy.

@defaultprophet: Well I love my life, and I have no white guilt. You should look into that.

This thread is pretty gross

@goldrock: I'm done with you. You're on the wrong side of history have fun with that kiddo

Personally I'm totally fine with the game staying as it was intended. I'm bisexual, and as much as i find it kind of...I wouldn't say offensive, more short sighted, that Nintendo overlooked anything outside of heterosexual relationships in a game largely about relationships, I understand that it is a product of a Japanese society where same sex marriage is still illegal, and hopefully Japan's laws on the matter will liberalise in due course, if public opinion there is sufficient to bring equality for people of alternative sexualities.

What is genuinely upsetting, however, are the responses of some people to the story. Let me say this clearly: the people who were protesting about this were not trying to stir up controversy for the sake of it. People do actually find it important to make their voices heard about inequalities they see, whether it be on a fairly insignificant matter such as this, or in bigger issues. People are seeking attention, but that is because getting the attention of people en masse is the only way that things will change.

The fact that same sex marriage was legalised here in the UK during the tenure of a Conservative government was what opened my eyes to the fact that people's opinions can and will change, and it isn't a waste of time, energy or forum space to continue championing your causes, to achieve equality for whatever group you belong. Sorry if anything i said seemed condescending, that wasn't my intention in any way, just trying to provide insight without resorting to name calling.

I weep for America.

@amafi: their original answer actually wasn't fine. A lot of people take their outrage to a point that is unreasonable, but it is still worth being critical about this without pulling out pitchforks and calling for boycotts.

Whether this is "fantasy" or not, they are still pushing a heteronormative view of relationships (meaning representing traditional roles of gender as being the only/correct option). Mass Effect and Dragon Age are fantasy worlds, but Bioware and EA have made it a point to push beyond that limited scope.

It's not about saying that showing traditional gender roles and man/woman relationships are bad. It's when the majority of media *only* represents those, that it is a problem. Though again, this is a case of being critical about an issue, without resorting to insults and boycotts. Issues like this serve as education pieces that, ideally, should help people take a more critical look at their world and understand how issues affect other people that are not them.

I'm against Itratonal behaviour on both sides of this issue. I just wanted to point out why people would not be satisfied with nintendo's original answer. Saying that it didn't matter because it was a fantasy world was actually dismissive of the point that it's pushing a heteronormative view. This answer has recognition of the problem. That's the best I could have reasonably hoped for.

@goldrock: I didn't make marriage some willy nilly thing, more than half of marriages ending in divorce made it some willy nilly thing that is so entrenched in our laws it affects, among other things: Taxes, burial, and visitation rights in hospitals.

How does a gay couple marrying affect your belief that marriage is important and for life exactly?

Also dude really? That shaman line is racist as hell.

@tomtomthepirate: Except you and I, as CIS White males(assuming), do get every game catered to us. Or at least 99.5% of them.

Nobody is calling for every game to have gay relationship options. The crux of this issue is that the main character in this game is representative of you. It's your mii. Only your gay mii has to be straight in this game.

@dudeglove: They probably were listening to their audience. Considering the LGBT community is estimated to be at best in the 3-4% range here in the US. Unless Nintendo attracts an abnormally high percentage of that demographic and hardly anyone else, would it even really worth their time to include same sex relationships in their silly little fantasy game? I mean considering they certainly wouldn't be aiming for that demographic in their own nation. So why even bother adding that to the NA release?

Where's the outcry over not having transgendered or even non-binary gendered relationships in this game? Or hell, pretty much any other game? Are they not also being marginalized? Are they not also facing the exact same mistreatment as gays and lesbians? Is their non inclusion further admittance from main stream media that they would rather pretend that they don't exist? Maybe they just don't represent a large enough audience to matter?

That's what this looks like to me. An incredibly small minority whom I, like most others in this thread, agree should be treated with dignity and given the same protection of basic rights as anyone else. But I take issue with trying to force anyone creating content or media to tack on the "ME TOO!". If I created a game I would have nothing to base a gay or lesbian relationship experience on, nor would 96% of the population. Patching that shit in well after the fact, just to appease a very vocal minority, would probably be hardly worth their time and would be patronizing to boot.

(pssst, go enjoy one of the MANY other games that already have same sex couples. There'll be plenty more after this one too. Nobody gets to have every game catered to them though, sorry.)

@goldrock: For all you know? If you honestly think she speaks for anything other than an extremely small minority... Dude do even some cursory research. Talk to a gay person.

I'm not equating the act of gay marriage to segregation or slavery, I'm comparing the logic behind your reasoning to other things that people have used the same reasoning towards. Don't kid yourself, the bible was used at the time to justify both of those.

Let's make it flippant instead: You wouldn't use "My beliefs" to justify banning skittles or the import of Nintendo games.

Also you don't believe in Divorce? Dude what

I haven't read through all the comments, I refuse to since everywhere has the same comments going on.

My issue isn't about same sex stuff, it's the creative freedom of a studio to make the game they envisioned.

You can either allow the studio to make the game they want or push so hard that games are made by consensus, maybe politics will get involved and legislate what they are allowed to make, coz we all want that don't we?

@defaultprophet: This was last year. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJrmBocx0o4

I'm not saying she speaks for everyone, but some portion must agree. How big a portion, I have no idea. For all I know, maybe she is the westboro baptist church of lesbians.

Equating gay marriage to slavery and segregation is a road you really don't want to go down, so you should probably stop and turn around.

I also don't believe in divorce.

I have no qualms with people feeling hurt or offended by something that doesn't offend me personally, and I'm totally in favour of positive social change, but I do worry that should Tomodachi Life be solely known as "that game what hates the gays," that the people who play it will be guilty by association.

I just don't want to feel like I'm being scolded for enjoying something.

Could we at least agree that playing Tomodachi Life is not a form of tacit support of homophobia? I think open discussion would be a lot easier if we can start there.

ITT: people who need to take a persuasive writing class

Quick guys: A bunch of straight white guys have spoken, this issue is over!

@goldrock: Yes one random lesbian writer speaks for everyone. She is clearly the mastermind or at least in on the cabal of trying to destroy the institution of marriage. The same institution that was once akin to chattel slavery and where divorcing took an order from God from his representatives on Earth. That in changing institution that has never changed throughout human history? Also when was this? Link?

Your beliefs don't trump the mistreatment of millions of people. Would you think that's a valid argument if somebody made it in favor of Jim Crow laws? Would you think that's a valid argument if you believed that women are the property of their husbands?

@thecheese33: Nintendo meant that the exclusion of same-sex couples was not intended as a social commentary. The interpretation that inclusion of same-sex couples would have been a social commentary is just that: an interpretation. That the statement was unclear and lead to misunderstanding is unfortunate.

that sucks that you were hurt by this, but i think you might have misread the original statement released by nintendo. given the context of the statement, i dont read ninentdo suggesting that it believes that the inclusion of same sex marriages in the game would be social commentary, but rather that the absence of non-hetero relationships was not meant to be taken as social commentary, which still might be troubling, that nintendo didnt include gay marriage in the game because it simply didnt think to, but not nearly as much as them not including the feature because of an anti-gay marriage stance.

Whats the point of your comment, apart from arguing for the sake of arguing, when I'm sure you're smart enough to know exactly what I mean. Thats like me saying "a company made a game that didn't include every single option to satisfy every single person? Discrimination."

@defaultprophet: It does matter though. When a lesbian writer comes out and says the gay marriage battle is a lie made to destroy the institution of marriage on a panel titled "Why get married when you can be happy", does that not throw up a red flag of any kind? My point was that I hold my beliefs in a higher place than just our laws.

Also, I find PDA between ANY people unsettling. AS SHOULD EVERYONE. Just sayin.

Still won't stop me from dressing a female Mii like Link and making him have babies with Miyamoto.

The biggest reason I'm disappointed that there is no same-sex relationships in the game is because I can't make Miyamoto and Mario kiss each other. WHY ARE YOU OPPRESSING ME, NINTENDO?!

@goldrock: Polygamy is a choice, being gay isn't. Polyamory between consenting adults, not Polygamy in the Utah sense of child brides and such, shouldn't be discriminated against either but that's neither here nor there.

As to your point that marriage goes beyond the law for you: It doesn't matter. Marriage is so wrapped up in our legal system that only gay marriage will give the exact same protection to gay couples as straight couples. When you say you're not anti gay but are anti gay marriage what you're saying is "they can do what they want but I don't want them to have all the rights I have". The other way to solve that is to take marriage out of every law and replace it with civil union or whatever and strike the term marriage from the culture. That's not going to happen.

Your behind closed doors comment is also troubling, do you find PDA between gay people unsettling?

Anyone saying that this game doesn't have to be inclusive and those of a different orientation don't have to play it: this article isn't relevant to you and you don't have to comment on it.

Everyone else: Criticism is fine, debate is welcome, but let's all keep it civil and don't insult each other. Anyone saying "but we are being civil" can't read all the posts we've had to remove.

And yeah, non-conducive pejoratives like "SWJ" are still going to get deleted. We haven't made it an official blanket rule yet, but try to see if you can make your point without saying "SWJ", "click-bait", "white knight" and other such dismissive terms that instantly grind any polite discussion to a halt. Treat it as a vocabulary exercise, if you'd prefer.

I too don't understand why '''The Gays''' are so intolerant of my desire to see them pushed out and marginalized in every aspect of society! We heterosexuals have been laid low for far too long!!

Only too often do I go outside only to see straight people being harassed in the street for nothing more than holding hands with their partners. When I turn on the news I am SICKENED to hear yet another story of a hetero child killing themselves because of bullying or, worse yet, a wholly heterosexual man or woman being murdered merely because they wanted to mush their genitals together with someone of the opposite sex!!! And now you're telling me that I might, hypothetically, someday have to deal with a protagonist who is likely a mid-30s stubbly-bearded brown-haired white guy with a raspy voice AND ALSO A QUEER?

I am being oppressed.

@defaultprophet: Is it not a valid argument? If you say no, you're lying to yourself. Either way, I'll explain what I meant.

There are people who legitimately hate gay people (like people that are actually racist and not "Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson racists"), and there are people who believe in marriage in its traditional sense. Personally, I don't care what you do behind closed doors, as long as you aren't hurting anyone. But don't tell me I can't believe in marriage being between one man and one woman only without being a gay hating bigot.

My definition of marriage goes beyond "law" and into my belief system, which is why I also disagree with polygamy (starting to work its way toward D.C.). So if I also disagree with polygamy, what specific type of person am I hating then? Unless there's a word now for being born a polygamist that I'm unaware of.. Give it time.

Anyway, I try to understand both sides in most cases arguments. And I do understand the other side in some cases. But the other side gets watered down when so many people on that side scream racism, sexism, homophobia incessantly.

I'm babbling now because I'm lacking sleep and I have a migraine. Hopefully this is readable because I'm not reading it to check it. Try to understand where I'm coming from with the marriage part.

@amyggen: You make a good argument for it being in the game and it contributing to the normalization in (parts of) the US. I agree with those points and didn't mean to come across as if I didn't. I think Nintendo should do what they want and I choose to believe that they are. I somewhat doubt they purposefully excluded it from the game, and it probably moreso had to do with how they were used to start up development for a game and whatnot. Oversight, basically. Whether true or not is neither here nor there, everyone can only speculate.

I wasn't so much commenting on this specific Nintendo story as I was on the situation in general. It was only a couple of weeks ago that I learned a bunch of states in the US still don't allow same sex marriage. I guess even though it was weeks ago, I'm still surprised by it and this story is just a reminder of it. Except I see outlash here, where for years I didn't hear anything about the real issue. That's when I said: that's ironic. Of course, I'm not actively keeping up to date on US politics obviously, but this might give some insight as to why I think all of this is kind of crazy.

What the hell is this?

I mean are gay people really that upset that Nintendo overlooked adding this?

It should always be respected that some people don't like the idea of gay relationships. As long as they keep that to themselves. It's called being tolerant... it works both ways...

We should all calm down and accept not all games HAVE to be inclusive.

@humanity said:

A public company made a public response to a public outcry? Bullying.

I feel bad that Nintendo is having to deal with bullshit like this. They made the game how they decided to make it (whether intentionally or unintentionally) and if that is disagreeable to you as the player then don't consume it. Very simple. I'm a longtime fan of Nintendo but I don't have a WiiU because I don't appreciate the product. This is fucking stupid.

I'm not interested in getting in a fight with anyone; I'd just like to express how Nintendo's press statement affected me. This is partially copy-pasted from my comment on this article; just felt it would be applicable here, too.

As for why what Nintendo said hurt... saying that they didn't want to make "social commentary" by including gay relationships is really dehumanizing. They, like so many others, consider my sexuality to be a political statement, which is something that can be objected to or dismissed as illegitimate. I already face rejection and "other-ing" from the vast majority of the world, where I'm treated as a novelty or an abomination. The last place I expected to be told that my mere existence was social commentary and that I didn't belong in their wacky little world was Nintendo, purveyors of the "fun for everyone" mentality.

Like most of you, I grew up with a Nintendo console or two; I went through several Game Boy models, and my first home console was a Nintendo 64. I'm also autistic, and while that's become easier to manage as time went on, at the beginning, it was really hard to socialize and make friends. But Nintendo was another way into the good graces of fellow kids, so I could focus on getting good at games like Smash Bros. and find commonality with them through that. I couldn't stare straight into someone's eyes or react properly to social cues, but Nintendo games made it easier to jump into conversations about trading Pokemon or beating Star Fox, and slowly work through there. And I was pretty thankful that Nintendo helped me with my social anxiety and struggles with communication, when others would write me off as "the weird kid" without making the effort to know me.

To make a long story short (too late!), Nintendo's comments made me wonder whether I was ever welcome in the first place. Sorry if that sounds melodramatic, but it really hit me that way when I read the press release for myself. I know, Nintendo have been terrible at PR and expressing themselves in a non-bumbling manner as of late, but there was something that felt real and cold about their statement. Maybe because I've seen echoes of it in the reactions I've received from others. Regardless, of all the mistakes Nintendo have made in the last few years, it was the very first one that had me considering abandoning the company altogether.

Again, I apologize if my earlier statements sounded like they were attacking anyone. I'm just really sore about this subject, and am used to seeing everyone react in a certain way to others like me in the LGBT community. I'd like nothing more than to have a good time with all of you, and I'm grateful that most of you are much friendlier than the people I would find in other communities.

@shortbreadtom: but Nintendo are a Japanese company and, with gay marriage being not only illegal in Japan but also regarded as taboo by a large portion of the population, it would indeed have been a social statement. Now I'm not saying I'm cool with that, it's fucked up, but how could one be suprised that this issue was treated the way it was with that in mind?

I think that this whole thing has been covered in a very western-centric way. It could have been used to highlight the fucked up ideals of Japan as a whole. Instead it was used to bash on Nintendo. What happened with Tomodachi Life is a symptom of a much bigger issue.

@goldrock: we both know that was the laziest possible response you could have made.

I think you missed the point on this one.

Mario is a fictional character. You're correct in saying that he can be what ever the designers created for him to be in their vision, just like all fictional characters! And yes, it would be absurd to suggest that Mario should be gay, or black, or whatever.

Miis, on the other hand, are designed to be stylised representations of yourself. You have a Mii avatar tied to your 3DS, showing the owner. Your 3DS (or was it WiiU?) can try to make a stylised representation of you by taking a photo of you. They're supposed to be literal representations of you, the player.

Now, if you were black, and when it took your photo it turned you into a white dude, then you can't just say "Well Nintendo doesn't need to care, Nintendo wants everyone to be white, that's the way Nintendo designed it!" That'd be a very insensitive view for Nintendo to take, and would negate the whole point of the Mii in the first place.

In short, saying a fictional character (such as Mario) should be what ever the designers want, and not changed into a gay black lady to match the gay black lady player, is absolutely correct.

But, saying that a gay black lady player can't have a representation of herself for a system designed entirely to be direct representations of the player, and instead insisting that all gamers should fit into the race/sexuality what the game developers envision is 'normal' and with no other choices, is pretty disgusting.

I find it real shitty that a company was bullied into apologizing for making a game they wanted to make. What happened to the Jeff Gerstmann creed of "not every game is for everyone / you don't have to like every game out there and thats ok." The people that just needed to have a relationship game with same sex marriage could have simply skipped this one.