Forums - Politics Discussion - (POSSIBLE SPOILERS INSIDE) The agenda and political discussion of Naughty Dog

Have politics damaged the quality of ND games

No 38 42.22%
 
Yes 52 57.78%
 
Total:90

Can I try to breathe some sense into both sides?

On one side, the opinion is that Neil tried to defend Laura Bailey and was very specific as to what kind of hate he was denouncing. Neil lifts up Laura by saying she is brave. This side promotes this kind of behaviour because it shames bad attitudes and exposes them, so they will stop. Some users believe this is the right approach because users in the future will be discouraged from posting in such a way in fear of being exposed.

The other side defends that Neil is using the wrong platform to do this, because it gives light to bad behaviours and allows such bad tweets to become a thing, which is akin to news about mass shootings which could fuel the next potential. He should be reporting these tweets to authorities, because death threats are serious. His motives of shaming are also questionable because he did so at other times when it was less laudable (like with Jason Schreier), and so his intentions of defending Laura, while praiseworthy, are tainted by his need to defend the game his name is attached to. Some mention that while the hate condemned in Neil's post is clear, it may be seen as a blank statement to vilify any kind of criticism or negativity about the game (this has already been done by him, and by many people on many platforms), and a way of portraying all those who are against the game as psychotic haters.

The takeaways are simple:
1) Laura Bailey didn't deserve this, she was doing her job.
2) Neil trying to defend her is noble, but defending her is arguably biased, and it would be wiser if he used another means to do so. (such as reporting)
3) Neil spiralled somewhat out of control on Twitter, being negative about other people, users and journalists alike.
4) We all need to be more civil and respectful towards each other, and to share an atmosphere of harmony.
5) Let's not lump all criticism of the game into one category of people (see "TLOU2 Haters Are Nut Jobs CONFIRMED" thread for more wisdom).



Around the Network
padib said:

Can I try to breathe some sense into both sides?

On one side, the opinion is that Neil tried to defend Laura Bailey and was very specific as to what kind of hate he was denouncing. Neil lifts up Laura by saying she is brave. This side promotes this kind of behaviour because it shames bad attitudes and exposes them, so they will stop. Some users believe this is the right approach because users in the future will be discouraged from posting in such a way in fear of being exposed.

The other side defends that Neil is using the wrong platform to do this, because it gives light to bad behaviours and allows such bad tweets to become a thing, which is akin to news about mass shootings which could fuel the next potential. He should be reporting these tweets to authorities, because death threats are serious. His motives of shaming are also questionable because he did so at other times when it was less laudable (like with Jason Schreier), and so his intentions of defending Laura, while praiseworthy, are tainted by his need to defend the game his name is attached to. Some mention that while the hate condemned in Neil's post is clear, it may be seen as a blank statement to vilify any kind of criticism or negativity about the game (this has already been done by him, and by many people on many platforms), and a way of portraying all those who are against the game as psychotic haters.

The takeaways are simple:
1) Laura Bailey didn't deserve this, she was doing her job.
2) Neil trying to defend her is noble, but defending her is arguably biased, and it would be wiser if he used another means to do so. (such as reporting)
3) Neil spiralled somewhat out of control on Twitter, being negative about other people, users and journalists alike.
4) We all need to be more civil and respectful towards each other, and to share an atmosphere of harmony.
5) Let's not lump all criticism of the game into one category of people (see "TLOU2 Haters Are Nut Jobs CONFIRMED" thread for more wisdom).

Valid points, and even though we can certainly claim Neil is biased we also have to accept that is natural that he is going to defend his work (doesn't matter if he considers himself a small part or the main part of the work).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

TLOU2's story would still be terrible even if all characters were straight white males, and conversely a story with nothing but lesbian women can still be good. You can say the reason for the bad writing is because they shifted priorities, propaganda over entertainment, but ultimately the fault is bad writing, so why make it about identity politics? I say just leave that to the people who wanna defend something but have no actual arguments to defend with.

I would like to know though what they were thinking when they decided to have pregnant women be soldiers. Already odd to have women fighting when humanity is on the brink of extinction, but my suspension of disbelief is completely shattered when they send pregnant women to battle despite having so many able bodies they coulda sent instead. Is this supposed to empower women, telling them they're just as capable as any man even while pregnant? Worst part is these women willingly chose to fight. Such stupid decisions and bad parenting triggered me to the point of hating this game more than any other. I guess I have to give Naughty Dog that, been a long time since something that doesn't directly affect my livelihood got me so angry.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
TLOU2's story would still be terrible even if all characters were straight white males, and conversely a story with nothing but lesbian women can still be good. You can say the reason for the bad writing is because they shifted priorities, propaganda over entertainment, but ultimately the fault is bad writing, so why make it about identity politics? I say just leave that to the people who wanna defend something but have no actual arguments to defend with.

I would like to know though what they were thinking when they decided to have pregnant women be soldiers. Already odd to have women fighting when humanity is on the brink of extinction, but my suspension of disbelief is completely shattered when they send pregnant women to battle despite having so many able bodies they coulda sent instead. Is this supposed to empower women, telling them they're just as capable as any man even while pregnant? Worst part is these women willingly chose to fight. Such stupid decisions and bad parenting triggered me to the point of hating this game more than any other. I guess I have to give Naughty Dog that, been a long time since something that doesn't directly affect my livelihood got me so angry.

Spoilers!

>Already odd to have women fighting when humanity is on the brink of extinction

What's odd about it?  In that event, everyone needs to have the skills to survive.  

>pregnant women to battle despite having so many able bodies they coulda sent instead.

She's not even there to fight.  She's one of the best medics.  That's why she's there.  

>Is this supposed to empower women, telling them they're just as capable as any man even while pregnant? 

Or more likely the point is that Isaac is a ruthless and uncaring leader.  A point suggested several times.  

- after coming out of a torture room, he sits down and starts eating, without even taking the time to wash his hands 

- he didn't give Abby any chance to explain herself before condemning her to death.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
TLOU2's story would still be terrible even if all characters were straight white males, and conversely a story with nothing but lesbian women can still be good. You can say the reason for the bad writing is because they shifted priorities, propaganda over entertainment, but ultimately the fault is bad writing, so why make it about identity politics? I say just leave that to the people who wanna defend something but have no actual arguments to defend with.

I would like to know though what they were thinking when they decided to have pregnant women be soldiers. Already odd to have women fighting when humanity is on the brink of extinction, but my suspension of disbelief is completely shattered when they send pregnant women to battle despite having so many able bodies they coulda sent instead. Is this supposed to empower women, telling them they're just as capable as any man even while pregnant? Worst part is these women willingly chose to fight. Such stupid decisions and bad parenting triggered me to the point of hating this game more than any other. I guess I have to give Naughty Dog that, been a long time since something that doesn't directly affect my livelihood got me so angry.

Because it makes you win arguments and allows you to call other people biggots.



Around the Network
the-pi-guy said:

Spoilers!

>Already odd to have women fighting when humanity is on the brink of extinction

What's odd about it?  In that event, everyone needs to have the skills to survive.  

>pregnant women to battle despite having so many able bodies they coulda sent instead.

She's not even there to fight.  She's one of the best medics.  That's why she's there.  

>Is this supposed to empower women, telling them they're just as capable as any man even while pregnant? 

Or more likely the point is that Isaac is a ruthless and uncaring leader.  A point suggested several times.  

- after coming out of a torture room, he sits down and starts eating, without even taking the time to wash his hands 

- he didn't give Abby any chance to explain herself before condemning her to death.

Women are generally physically inferior to men and therefore not as good of fighters, but it's not just that alone since they could still be used as meatshields and distractions at the very least. It's because they're the ones who bear children, making them inherently more valuable for survival. A woman can only have one baby at a time, but a single man could impregnate every women that exist, making them more expendable.

Dina and whatever her name is both went because they wanted to, selfishly putting their child in danger. They armed themselves with guns because they knew they'd have to fight which they did, and even if they are the best candidates under normal circumstances, they're not while pregnant, especially whats her name who looked like she could give birth at any moment.

I'm talking about why they decided to have pregnant women fighting in this game. Plenty of other ways to make Isaac ruthless and evil, though he didn't forcibly send out whatever her name is, again that was her choice.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
the-pi-guy said:

Spoilers!

>Already odd to have women fighting when humanity is on the brink of extinction

What's odd about it?  In that event, everyone needs to have the skills to survive.  

>pregnant women to battle despite having so many able bodies they coulda sent instead.

She's not even there to fight.  She's one of the best medics.  That's why she's there.  

>Is this supposed to empower women, telling them they're just as capable as any man even while pregnant? 

Or more likely the point is that Isaac is a ruthless and uncaring leader.  A point suggested several times.  

- after coming out of a torture room, he sits down and starts eating, without even taking the time to wash his hands 

- he didn't give Abby any chance to explain herself before condemning her to death.

Women are generally physically inferior to men and therefore not as good of fighters, but it's not just that alone since they could still be used as meatshields and distractions at the very least. It's because they're the ones who bear children, making them inherently more valuable for survival. A woman can only have one baby at a time, but a single man could impregnate every women that exist, making them more expendable.

Dina and whatever her name is both went because they wanted to, selfishly putting their child in danger. They armed themselves with guns because they knew they'd have to fight which they did, and even if they are the best candidates under normal circumstances, they're not while pregnant, especially whats her name who looked like she could give birth at any moment.

I'm talking about why they decided to have pregnant women fighting in this game. Plenty of other ways to make Isaac ruthless and evil, though he didn't forcibly send out whatever her name is, again that was her choice.

That is what we call reaching. Both pregnant women in the game gone to battle because they disobeyed others mostly.

And yes Abby's friend was to far in the pregnancy to do the stunts she done, it is obtuse, but again on a post-apocalyptical world each person needs to fend for himself.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:

That is what we call reaching. Both pregnant women in the game gone to battle because they disobeyed others mostly.

And yes Abby's friend was to far in the pregnancy to do the stunts she done, it is obtuse, but again on a post-apocalyptical world each person needs to fend for himself.

It's a post-apocalyptic world but society still exist within it. Both women come from organized groups with a large population compared to the 2 or 3 people per squad they send out. Could have easily sent another person instead, though in Dina's case the asshole hid the fact that she was preggers.

I'm not gonna say pregnant women in combat could never makes sense. If their settlement was being overrun and they were all about to die, then it would be understandable and show how desperate their situation is, but that's not the case here.

Seriously, preggers willingly fighting in war, how do you even have this thought? When I think of a pregnant women I think of family n love, but maybe I'm just a sexist misogynist lul.



Lonely_Dolphin said:
the-pi-guy said:

Spoilers!

>Already odd to have women fighting when humanity is on the brink of extinction

What's odd about it?  In that event, everyone needs to have the skills to survive.  

>pregnant women to battle despite having so many able bodies they coulda sent instead.

She's not even there to fight.  She's one of the best medics.  That's why she's there.  

>Is this supposed to empower women, telling them they're just as capable as any man even while pregnant? 

Or more likely the point is that Isaac is a ruthless and uncaring leader.  A point suggested several times.  

- after coming out of a torture room, he sits down and starts eating, without even taking the time to wash his hands 

- he didn't give Abby any chance to explain herself before condemning her to death.

Women are generally physically inferior to men and therefore not as good of fighters, but it's not just that alone since they could still be used as meatshields and distractions at the very least. It's because they're the ones who bear children, making them inherently more valuable for survival. A woman can only have one baby at a time, but a single man could impregnate every women that exist, making them more expendable.

Dina and whatever her name is both went because they wanted to, selfishly putting their child in danger. They armed themselves with guns because they knew they'd have to fight which they did, and even if they are the best candidates under normal circumstances, they're not while pregnant, especially whats her name who looked like she could give birth at any moment.

I'm talking about why they decided to have pregnant women fighting in this game. Plenty of other ways to make Isaac ruthless and evil, though he didn't forcibly send out whatever her name is, again that was her choice.

>Women are generally physically inferior to men and therefore not as good of fighters, but it's not just that alone since they could still be used as meatshields and distractions at the very least. It's because they're the ones who bear children, making them inherently more valuable for survival. A woman can only have one baby at a time, but a single man could impregnate every women that exist, making them more expendable.

Not everyone cares about that.  It's not a woman's job to have babies.  They're not obligated to do so.  It doesn't matter if there are a billion women on Earth or 1, no one is obligated to become pregnant.  

And again in this world, everyone needs to be able to fight.  Even if women were kept home, people still can turn into infected, or outsiders can still break in.  Safer to be able to have everyone train.  

>selfishly putting their child in danger

That's kind of a big point in both games.  People are selfish.  

>I'm talking about why they decided to have pregnant women fighting in this game. Plenty of other ways to make Isaac ruthless and evil, though he didn't forcibly send out whatever her name is, again that was her choice.

Again, I said she's primarily a medic, not a fighter.  

Besides the game doesn't celebrate either of them going into fights.  

Dina stays in the theater after they think she's pregnant.  

Abby is constantly concerned about Mel getting into things she shouldn't.  

Pretty much the only thing the game points to:

-Dina risks it for love.  

-Mel gets pushed into doing it by Isaac.  



the-pi-guy said:

>Women are generally physically inferior to men and therefore not as good of fighters, but it's not just that alone since they could still be used as meatshields and distractions at the very least. It's because they're the ones who bear children, making them inherently more valuable for survival. A woman can only have one baby at a time, but a single man could impregnate every women that exist, making them more expendable.

Not everyone cares about that.  It's not a woman's job to have babies.  They're not obligated to do so.  It doesn't matter if there are a billion women on Earth or 1, no one is obligated to become pregnant.  

And again in this world, everyone needs to be able to fight.  Even if women were kept home, people still can turn into infected, or outsiders can still break in.  Safer to be able to have everyone train.  

>selfishly putting their child in danger

That's kind of a big point in both games.  People are selfish.  

>I'm talking about why they decided to have pregnant women fighting in this game. Plenty of other ways to make Isaac ruthless and evil, though he didn't forcibly send out whatever her name is, again that was her choice.

Again, I said she's primarily a medic, not a fighter.  

Besides the game doesn't celebrate either of them going into fights.  

Dina stays in the theater after they think she's pregnant.  

Abby is constantly concerned about Mel getting into things she shouldn't.  

Pretty much the only thing the game points to:

-Dina risks it for love.  

-Mel gets pushed into doing it by Isaac.  

I'm well aware not everyone cares about logic haha. Like I said it's just odd. The real world already doesn't send women to the front lines most of the time, so it's interesting that women are commonplace on the front lines in a post-apocalyptic setting where you'd think the survival of humanity would be a bit more pressing.

Perhaps if Dina got even a fraction of the development Joel got I'd think less of her actions, but sadly she didn't. She just turns into a hypocrite later. The idea of putting your child at risk to be with the one you love isn't an inherently bad concept I'll admit, but the execution needs to be real good to not end up making the character look bad.

You can say she's primarily a medic, but that's irrelevant to what she actually does, fighting on the front lines same as everyone else. Isaac did not make her do it, when you start the 10 hour stretch as Abby, she is told she didn't have to go if she didn't want to. I may not remember her name but I do remember that much.