(POSSIBLE SPOILERS INSIDE) The agenda and political discussion of Naughty Dog

[DonFerrari]

Runa216 said:

DonFerrari said:
Just a reminder. This thread is to discuss the perceived politics of ND and its effects on game development not to antagonize other users, groups, parties, etc. Please keep civil and discuss Naughty Dog games.

Exactly. I'm saying that inclusion is not a matter of politics but a natural progression of storytelling in the modern world and that including gay/trans characters to a narrative shouldn't be seen as a political statement. Because, you know, it's not. 

But you and others are saying it is. That's the problem here. Having queer characters in a game shouldn't be some point of contention, it should be a perfectly viable, and normal way to tell stories. That's how we remove the stigma associated with it, by normalizing it. The arguments I'm contesting are the ones that maintain the status quo by acting like literally any inclusion of queer characters is some SJW agenda and should be treated as a political issue. To make matters worse, just like @Soundwave said, the talking points around the issue have shifted becuase it's agreed on a widespread level that you can't just say 'get the gays out of our game' anymore, so now people are twisting these points and these stories so that they can justify their bigotry by claiming it's 'bad writing' or 'hamfisted character inclusion' when it's no worse than straight male inclusion. It's just another character archetype, not a goddamn political statement.

I have yet to see an ACTUAL argument about the game's story that didn't circle back to 'b-b-b-but my sensibilities! SJW propaganda!' Many try to avoid it, but it's not hard to read between the lines. 

Personally, I absolutely hate The Last of Us, but it's not for the story/writing. I always found the gameplay to be boring and mundane and frustrating. I always found that the gameplay only ever existed to perpetuate the plot...but I always felt the plot was outstandingly well-written and well-presented. the game's visuals, audio, and storytelling elements were all top-of-class and I acknowledged that while also not liking the games becuase I care more about gameplay than the other elements in a game. People forgave the bland and lacklustre gameplay elements becuase the story and character work was so good. but now? Now that Ellie's sexuality and various other progressive inclusions are a part of the story, suddenly everyone hates their writing? 

Naw, I don't buy it. I've experienced the modern political climate long enough to not trust that. I've been on the internet long enough that I have no doubt in my mind that this assault on The Last of Us Part II has nothing to do with the actual writing/storytelling and almost everything to do with the perceived SJW agenda of the development team. This fan hatred is nothing more than thinly veiled bigotry masquerading as legitimate criticism. 

Again, if you and others could accept that this is truly about your discomfort and resistance of progress, then maybe we could have a productive discussion about it. But instead of actually explaining yourself, you're just playing the victim to try and get sympathy points while calling me a meanie for expecting you to be held accountable for your regressive beliefs all while being purposefully disingenuous about your opinions on the matter and attempting to justify the backlash. It's not helpful. If you don't like the game, don't play it. If you don't agree with the direction of the story, don't watch a playthrough of it. but for the love of progress, please don't try to hold the rest of us back with your regressive views and play the victim when you're called out on it. 

**Edit** I got DonFerrari and EnricoPallazoo mixed up. My bad. Assume all my points in this post were directed at Enrico, not DonFerrari. I am unsure of DonFerrari's stance on the matter. 

My stance on the matter is that government shouldn`t mix on your personal life so sexuality is totally not political subject for me. You should be able to marry anyone you want that isn`t a minor or mentally challenged if that person agrees.

On gaming diversity can be political (because devs are made of people and thus they also have their political views), but yep having diversity on a game isn`t necessarily a political thing. In some cases it needs to have a very diverse cast (like if you are representing a current NYC for example), in other cases it make very little sense (like feudal japan having a female transgender gay black samurai, yes I exaggerated in purpose just to show that it would make very little sense unless it involved time travelling) in most other cases it is really neutral can be good or bad depending on how the game is made (so basically nothing to do with diversity). So if a game is forced in a way to have diversity it may have bad outcome (or at least be a product I don`t like). Most of my view is on the OP and I don`t think ND changing their way is necessarily bad.

shikamaru317 said:

DonFerrari said:

Considering the game have 7k reviews on PSN with average 4,5/5 versus 50k reviews on metacritic with average 3,9/10 I would say it is mostly column A.

Don't forget that you need to own the game to rate it on PSN. I've seen quite alot of people on twitter and such saying they weren't buying it because they saw the plot leaks and didn't want to play it after that. I'm sure that alot of the Metacritic user reviews are from those who didn't buy it because they were made about the plot. There is too much negativity there for it to be mainly from the anti-woke crowd, especially since many of the most upvoted negative user reviews mention how bad the plot is, some in great detail. 

That much is true.