Nintendo Promises Future Tomodachi Games Will Be More "Inclusive"

@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.

I weep for America.

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.

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

This thread is pretty gross

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

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

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.

@suicrat: Well said.

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

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."

This whole comment section makes me want to drink heavily.

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...

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.

@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.

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).

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

@sergio: I guess you have a stronger stomach than I do.

@chrisharris: Exactly. I know this is the internet, where everyone is at each other's throats at a moment's notice, but a bit more level headedness wouldn't go amiss.

I think that their second statement is kind of what was needed: it is a clarification, it stops people taking the first statement as being explicitly "anti-gay", which almost certainly (or at least hopefully) wasn't their intention.

If people hadn't reacted as vocally as they did though, then there wouldn't have been a clarification, and those that did feel that the first statement meant that including same sex marriage would be social commentary, rather than that excluding same sex marriage wasn't intended as social commentary, would have been left feeling that their requests had gone unheard by Nintendo, when in fact they had, but the response probably wasn't as clear cut as it should have been.

I get what you're saying but getting a company as big as Nintendo to acknowledge the desire for a same-sex option could potentially be pretty important to some people.

Also I don't know I would describe it as apologizing for making a game they wanted to make, at least not without knowing more about the creative process behind the game. My guess from the wording of their statements is they just never really thought to consider the same-sex option in the first place. If so I think there's a crucial difference between having a very specific artistic vision and just forgetting to include something. I think if you said to Nintendo before they started connecting and creating TL "Would you rather make a relationship game with same-sex relationships or without them?" they would answer "With".

Again though I don't know the reasoning and don't wish to make any assumptions as to Nintendo's motives. Just wanna point out that I don't think it's particularly fair to say they were bullied into apologising for nothing.

@euandewar: I simply think there has been a strange shift in consumers buying a product and accepting it's strengths and limitations, and this new blooming movement of purchasing a product and then demanding that product be changed to match their specific expectations. Could they have added same sex marriage? Of course. Should they have? Well thats more of a grey area to me. Should people who bought the game be upset, or in some cases even outraged, that this option is not in it and in turn demand Nintendo patch it in? As far as I'm concerned, no. To me the game is what it is and it feels a bit presumptuous, not to use the now ruined word "entitled", to say "no, I don't like this - change it."

I completely understand why people would want a game with same sex marriage and I'm not opposed to it at all. Heck, I had a beautiful family in a Sims game with a same sex couple that adopted a child which later attended a private school and was the pride of the family - it was great. I simply don't quite understand the mentality of asking, or in some cases demanding, that games be changed after the fact.

After reading some of these comments, I can't help but feel that pieces like Samantha Allen's post on Polygon did much more harm then good.

To me, Miieqauility started as a extremely civil request. "Heeeey. We would really like this feature for these reasons. I realize that it probably can't make it into this game. But maybe add it in a patch? Or in the next Tomodachi Life? It would be best if you could just acknowledge this. Thanks!"

There was no outrage. No vitriol. No bullying like some of these comments claim.

But then I read Samantha Allen talking about "the beating, bigoted heart of Nintendo" and I'm like 'Whoa, whoa whoa! This is a bit much! She doesn't represent us!'

But stuff like that happens a few times and now we have a forum war. One where I bet people would probably agree if they didn't both make assumptions about what assholes the other side are.

I will just say that while I think some parties overreacted on both sides in the name of sensationalizing this story, I'm glad we've reached this resolution. And I'm triple glad that this headline contains the phrase "future Tomodachi games" because I don't want this crazy train to stop at one game. I'll leave it at that and stay out of the word wars.

Anytime a game or anything for that matter is bullied into changing is an all around a bad thing.

Nintendo's new comment should have been the one they issued first. It really pisses me off when people imply that the inclusion of LGBT content in games is a political statement. It's not. People don't have gay relationships to protest hetero normative intolerance. They do it because that's what feels natural, just like straight people do. Homosexual love is only as political as heterosexual love.

Very confused by this. The entire internet read Nintendo's statement as "We deliberately did not include gay relationships because we wanted to avoid making a social commentary" but I read it as "We did not intentionally exclude gay relationships to make a specific statement about gay relationships."

Nintendo is not saying gay = social commentary.

@aetheldod: Sure, if Nintendo have all the right in the world to do so, then people who are being excluded by these decisions have a right to complain.

Mayhaps people in this thread should have some form of social empathy instead of "im a white cishet male, who cares?!??!!?!?!?!??!?!?!?! *folds arms, bees fly out of eyesockets*

I guess we just have a pretty fundamental disagreement then because I do feel in this case that people were well within their right to ask the questions that were asked. Sorry to have wasted your time.

@jumbs: And I say they dont because it is a company not a democracy. Or as I stated if they had promised that then sure and I would have joined the complaining. And since when did this became about race? Because Im white and heterosexual Im automaticly wrong? So you are saying that if a some one makes a media product that exludes me I should have the right to demand them to change their product to catter to me? No I dont , if I disagree I will just not buy the product (as I dont buy stuff that catter to LGT becuse I have no interest on it or exteme feminist agenda etc.)

The internet will still be mad, because of the fact that Nintendo will include same sex marriage IF they make another Tomadachi. Nintendo is still a company that wants to make money and more importantly needs to make money, so if Tomadachi isn't profitable enough for a sequel, they're not going to make one just to calm the internet down.

I don't understand how the new statement is considered a "backtrack" from the original. If the original stated that any upcoming sequel would never include these new elements then it would be backtracking...but it doesn't. I think i'm starting to understand the Nintendo Direct thing, the press seems to try and burn Nintendo every chance they get.

Maybe Nintendo shouldn't have begun to localize it at all, that would have solved the issue from the beginning. Maybe no one would be happy, but no one would care I guess.

I'm also interested in seeing how the game actually does, because the more I hear about it the more... boring it sounds.

Any reason you're dropping the B in LGBT?

And no, you're not wrong if you're a white cis dude. I'm a white cis dude and I'm on the other side of the issue. The difference is I'm trying to see it from the side of a gay dude or lady and you're ignoring their voices.

But I don't know why I'm responding to you when you used such tired hyperbole and feminazis.

@tebbit: This post is so wrong in so so so many ways.

@melodiousj: Playing Tomodachi doesn't make you homophobic. But I do feel that games that are intentionally exclusionary should not be played, if only to send a message.

@euandewar: They were fine in asking the proverbial "why", but do you think it's ok for people to ask the developer to change a game after release when the changes aren't addressing game breaking bugs? Did this small game really warrant the amount of commotion that was raised around it?

Yes I do think the amount of commotion was warranted because the game may be small but the company behind it is not.

Yes I do think it's ok for people to ask the developer to change a game after release in cases like this because if they can't do it all they have to do is respond with why and if they can reasonably do it and it will make a significant amount of people happier and not affect anyone else then why not?

@bunnymud: Yea, that time we let women vote? Bad.

If Nintendo knew they would receive this much backlash for not including same-sex marriage then I'm pretty sure they would have either given the development team enough time to implement the feature, or simply not bothered with localizing the game at all. At this point in time they kind of need all the money they can get, so why would they intentionally leave out the feature and risk alienating a significant portion of their American fan base?

The answer is they most likely did not intentionally leave it out as some sort of homophobic social exclusionary commentary as the internet is wont to believe, and just didn't realize that same-sex marriage is something that the American market would want. (As people have mentioned and as far as I am aware, gay rights are barely a thing in Japan. But correct me if I'm wrong.) The criticisms about it feeling like a missing feature are completely fair, but to jump the gun and call Nintendo homophobic for leaving it out is baseless conjecture, and would make you as much of a problem as the bigots you decry.

Agreed. They were almost certainly not going to be able to change it at this stage, but explaining why and promising to include it from the beginning next time is a much better response.

@defaultprophet: Fair about the hyperbole :/ and Im sorry and no I forgot the B , not on purpose D: I knew I was missing a letter so sorry about that too.