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

From my perspective, I haven’t got too far in the game so far, but I think it’s easier for people to be ‘less bothered’ about it all if the characters are more well rounded. Most don’t seem to have a problem with Ellie being the lead character as it feels like a natural progression from the first game. Also her being a lesbian isn’t her defining character trait - in the first game it’s her immunity and in this one its her desire for revenge. Her character is more fleshed out. With Dina though, she doesn’t seem to do anything except be Ellie’s girlfriend. As I’ve said, I’m still not too far through the game so maybe that will change but so far I find her fairly boring. This makes it hard for anyone to connect with her, which doesn’t help other perceptions.

Last edited by SecondWar - on 09 July 2020

Around the Network
the-pi-guy said:
EricHiggin said:

It's almost like people need to be clear about things they say and portray and explain them well, even in just the right way, for others to understand in a manner that they may agree with. It's almost like if you don't do that, people have no choice but to interpret what you put in front of them, in which they may see things differently to some degree, and may disagree with the intended meaning.

Why some can get away with poor etiquette by being vague, while others can't however, is still a mystery...

Who's being vague?  There's no name in your post.  Who are you even talking about?  I don't understand why some posters are allowed  to have such poor etiquette being so vague.  You really ought to be clear about who you are talking about by spelling out their name.

He literally quotes a message in that tweet. 

He's not being vague, he's explicitly referencing that tweet.  

The problem in understanding here isn't on Neil.  For some reason you are not applying the skills of reading context that you use every time you read or write a response to a quoted message.  

Just like every forum poster can infer who you are talking about, you should be able to infer what Neil is talking about considering he literally shared this tweet in exactly the same way that you quoted Hynad's post:

https://mobile.twitter.com/laurabaileyvo/status/1279173199918292992

If Neil is being vague, so are you.  

Sounds a little like a bad faith counter to me. Lot's of them going around lately though.

And yes, my post was partially vague as it goes much deeper, while making a few related and unrelated points, but is it poor etiquette or 'visionary artistic communication'?

DonFerrari said:
EricHiggin said:

I dunno. Are exotic cars a form of popular travel or not?

It depends on what you want to compare them to.

Are Honda Civics and Minecraft also forms of popular travel and entertainment?

If so, what does that make exotic cars and AAA games?

Not sure what you are trying to imply, but quite possibly the cost of development of a Honda Civic is similar to an exotic car, but for different reasons and perhaps individual models end up being cheaper to design because of the accumulated knowledge. Don't forget that they keep researching on how to make it cheaper to manufacture. Exotic cars are somewhat challenging conventions and most desire it but isn't popular at all. Still have no idea what you are trying to mirror with that.

If AAA games are automatically popular entertainment, then exotic cars are also automatically popular forms of travel/transportation.

I would never say exotic cars are a popular form of travel, based on their sales, compared to something like a Honda Civic.

I would never say TLOU(2) is popular entertainment, based on their sales, compared to something like Minecraft.

It depends on how you want to compare them, or just giving them labels without context.



EricHiggin said:
the-pi-guy said:

Who's being vague?  There's no name in your post.  Who are you even talking about?  I don't understand why some posters are allowed  to have such poor etiquette being so vague.  You really ought to be clear about who you are talking about by spelling out their name.

He literally quotes a message in that tweet. 

He's not being vague, he's explicitly referencing that tweet.  

The problem in understanding here isn't on Neil.  For some reason you are not applying the skills of reading context that you use every time you read or write a response to a quoted message.  

Just like every forum poster can infer who you are talking about, you should be able to infer what Neil is talking about considering he literally shared this tweet in exactly the same way that you quoted Hynad's post:

https://mobile.twitter.com/laurabaileyvo/status/1279173199918292992

If Neil is being vague, so are you.  

Sounds a little like a bad faith counter to me. Lot's of them going around lately though.

And yes, my post was partially vague as it goes much deeper, while making a few related and unrelated points, but is it poor etiquette or 'visionary artistic communication'?

DonFerrari said:

Not sure what you are trying to imply, but quite possibly the cost of development of a Honda Civic is similar to an exotic car, but for different reasons and perhaps individual models end up being cheaper to design because of the accumulated knowledge. Don't forget that they keep researching on how to make it cheaper to manufacture. Exotic cars are somewhat challenging conventions and most desire it but isn't popular at all. Still have no idea what you are trying to mirror with that.

If AAA games are automatically popular entertainment, then exotic cars are also automatically popular forms of travel/transportation.

I would never say exotic cars are a popular form of travel, based on their sales, compared to something like a Honda Civic.

I would never say TLOU(2) is popular entertainment, based on their sales, compared to something like Minecraft.

It depends on how you want to compare them, or just giving them labels without context.

Not really apple to apple.

AAA games aren't automatically popular because of the cost of production, but because they target mass market appeal (to pay for the cost of course is part of it), sure not all AAA games do that well in sales but they are designed for it. Exotic cars are designed to be limited in sales.

Minecraft is an odd title, there are very few titles that sell over 20M, so to say only over 20M is popular (or worse your case with Minecraft and 100M sales).

You are likely reaching with your comparison. You need to look at the industry, you have the best sellers, that on PS1 used to mean like over 100k sales and nowadays is over 1M. If you want to stretch it then perhaps 5M.

So it doesn't matter the reasonable metric you use, TLOU and TLOU2 are popular entertainment.



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

You know, disregarding the toxic discussion happening in this thread I have to ask: Why is it a bad thing to have an agenda? Most art does. Most artists have intentions when they create their art. If they choose to use their medium to help with trans/lesbian representation, I don't see how that's a bad thing at all. The only people who have a problem with that are bigots. If they choose to make a story about the nature of revenge and how it consumes you, then so be it. If they think that killing off a character makes sense in the context of the story, then that's their right as artists. IF they make you play as the bad guy/girl, then that's an interesting commentary on multiple viewpoints.

Getting angry about any of this shows more about the maturity of the lot of you than the quality of the game. You're perfectly entitled to be angry about these things, but just know that you don't get to also be pissed off when someone is critical of you in turn. Either criticism is allowed on both sides of the debate or it's not. You can't just cherry-pick what's convenient for you and get bent out of shape when something doesn't cater to your tastes.

And you really, really shouldn't be stirring up shit because a company has an agenda and is making moves to actively add inclusiveness in their stories. If you are, then it shows you're just not a good person and don't deserve to have your regressive, immature voice heard. I know that's not where this thread has been for most of its duration, but we all know damn well that like 90% of the hate this game gets is 'but lesbian! but (potential) trans woman! Bah! I hate it when companies try to push their SJW agenda!'



I got it all, baby! 

PS4, Switch, WiiU, XBO, PC
Vita, 3DS, Android

Top 6 this generation: 
Bloodborne, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, God of War, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III, Red Dead Redemption II

Runa216 said:
You know, disregarding the toxic discussion happening in this thread I have to ask: Why is it a bad thing to have an agenda? Most art does. Most artists have intentions when they create their art. If they choose to use their medium to help with trans/lesbian representation, I don't see how that's a bad thing at all. The only people who have a problem with that are bigots. If they choose to make a story about the nature of revenge and how it consumes you, then so be it. If they think that killing off a character makes sense in the context of the story, then that's their right as artists. IF they make you play as the bad guy/girl, then that's an interesting commentary on multiple viewpoints.

Getting angry about any of this shows more about the maturity of the lot of you than the quality of the game. You're perfectly entitled to be angry about these things, but just know that you don't get to also be pissed off when someone is critical of you in turn. Either criticism is allowed on both sides of the debate or it's not. You can't just cherry-pick what's convenient for you and get bent out of shape when something doesn't cater to your tastes.

And you really, really shouldn't be stirring up shit because a company has an agenda and is making moves to actively add inclusiveness in their stories. If you are, then it shows you're just not a good person and don't deserve to have your regressive, immature voice heard. I know that's not where this thread has been for most of its duration, but we all know damn well that like 90% of the hate this game gets is 'but lesbian! but (potential) trans woman! Bah! I hate it when companies try to push their SJW agenda!'

For me the only real issue with having an agenda is the same as being a fanboy or similar. Not being open with it or trying to deny you have.

If someone tell me he is a Xbox fanboy or an avocate for LGBTQI+ I'll take their opinion or facts at face value and may agree or not and will just discuss it. If a person say is neutral or similar but it is very clear that is a lie I know that the points are actually pretension so I can't take it at face value and have to double think on the intentions.



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

Around the Network
Runa216 said:
You know, disregarding the toxic discussion happening in this thread I have to ask: Why is it a bad thing to have an agenda? Most art does. Most artists have intentions when they create their art. If they choose to use their medium to help with trans/lesbian representation, I don't see how that's a bad thing at all. The only people who have a problem with that are bigots. If they choose to make a story about the nature of revenge and how it consumes you, then so be it. If they think that killing off a character makes sense in the context of the story, then that's their right as artists. IF they make you play as the bad guy/girl, then that's an interesting commentary on multiple viewpoints.

Getting angry about any of this shows more about the maturity of the lot of you than the quality of the game. You're perfectly entitled to be angry about these things, but just know that you don't get to also be pissed off when someone is critical of you in turn. Either criticism is allowed on both sides of the debate or it's not. You can't just cherry-pick what's convenient for you and get bent out of shape when something doesn't cater to your tastes.

And you really, really shouldn't be stirring up shit because a company has an agenda and is making moves to actively add inclusiveness in their stories. If you are, then it shows you're just not a good person and don't deserve to have your regressive, immature voice heard. I know that's not where this thread has been for most of its duration, but we all know damn well that like 90% of the hate this game gets is 'but lesbian! but (potential) trans woman! Bah! I hate it when companies try to push their SJW agenda!'

For me the only real issue with having an agenda is the same as being a fanboy or similar. Not being open with it or trying to deny you have.

If someone tell me he is a Xbox fanboy or an avocate for LGBTQI+ I'll take their opinion or facts at face value and may agree or not and will just discuss it. If a person say is neutral or similar but it is very clear that is a lie I know that the points are actually pretension so I can't take it at face value and have to double think on the intentions.

About your last paragraph, there is a confirmed transwoman in the game, but not what people thought due to the leaks.



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

Runa216 said:
You know, disregarding the toxic discussion happening in this thread I have to ask: Why is it a bad thing to have an agenda? Most art does. Most artists have intentions when they create their art. If they choose to use their medium to help with trans/lesbian representation, I don't see how that's a bad thing at all. The only people who have a problem with that are bigots. If they choose to make a story about the nature of revenge and how it consumes you, then so be it. If they think that killing off a character makes sense in the context of the story, then that's their right as artists. IF they make you play as the bad guy/girl, then that's an interesting commentary on multiple viewpoints.

Getting angry about any of this shows more about the maturity of the lot of you than the quality of the game. You're perfectly entitled to be angry about these things, but just know that you don't get to also be pissed off when someone is critical of you in turn. Either criticism is allowed on both sides of the debate or it's not. You can't just cherry-pick what's convenient for you and get bent out of shape when something doesn't cater to your tastes.

And you really, really shouldn't be stirring up shit because a company has an agenda and is making moves to actively add inclusiveness in their stories. If you are, then it shows you're just not a good person and don't deserve to have your regressive, immature voice heard. I know that's not where this thread has been for most of its duration, but we all know damn well that like 90% of the hate this game gets is 'but lesbian! but (potential) trans woman! Bah! I hate it when companies try to push their SJW agenda!'

Not a bad thing at all,almost everything has some political bias/agenda.

Execution is ofcourse important,how a character is written makes me like or dislike them no matter how they look or what sex they have and that is how many people see it but people see an agenda better now because it is attached to something more unknown to them and assume the creaters behind it found it enough to add diversity as a shallow layer without depth,does not make them all bigots against trans etc... but question why the directors thought it was enough to make characters so shallow.

Same people you might think are bigots did like this animation here that is filled with genders and difference in sexuality,difference is the writing that made them more likeable.

Where is the positivity about people liking this much diversity and where was the positivity about people liking diversity before,it existed but it is forgotten so soon and like moths to flames(dark souls,yes i'm a fanboy) the negative stands out more and gives people a twisted view at the quantity of the actual bigots.

Last edited by Immersiveunreality - on 09 July 2020

DonFerrari said:

About your last paragraph, there is a confirmed transwoman in the game, but not what people thought due to the leaks.

Do you mean Lev? He's a trans-man, not a trans-woman.

Anyway, what I have found silly about the reaction to him actually comes from some members of the trans-community. Apparently, the character has been criticised for begin written by non-trans writers. I didn't realise that was a pre-condition, even though they seem to have gone to great lengths to do a fair portrayal.

They also got criticised for having the Seraphites using Lev's birth name. To me, this is realistic, as a hardcore religious cult isn't going to try to be respectful to Lev. It might not be pleasant, especially for trans-people, but it is realistic.

Last edited by SecondWar - on 09 July 2020

DonFerrari said:
EricHiggin said:

Sounds a little like a bad faith counter to me. Lot's of them going around lately though.

And yes, my post was partially vague as it goes much deeper, while making a few related and unrelated points, but is it poor etiquette or 'visionary artistic communication'?

If AAA games are automatically popular entertainment, then exotic cars are also automatically popular forms of travel/transportation.

I would never say exotic cars are a popular form of travel, based on their sales, compared to something like a Honda Civic.

I would never say TLOU(2) is popular entertainment, based on their sales, compared to something like Minecraft.

It depends on how you want to compare them, or just giving them labels without context.

Not really apple to apple.

AAA games aren't automatically popular because of the cost of production, but because they target mass market appeal (to pay for the cost of course is part of it), sure not all AAA games do that well in sales but they are designed for it. Exotic cars are designed to be limited in sales.

Minecraft is an odd title, there are very few titles that sell over 20M, so to say only over 20M is popular (or worse your case with Minecraft and 100M sales).

You are likely reaching with your comparison. You need to look at the industry, you have the best sellers, that on PS1 used to mean like over 100k sales and nowadays is over 1M. If you want to stretch it then perhaps 5M.

So it doesn't matter the reasonable metric you use, TLOU and TLOU2 are popular entertainment.

AAA games aren't the exotic cars of the gaming industry? What other types of games have more time and money spent on their development?

If you want to change it to sports cars, that's fine to. Maybe more realistic for you but it's the same result in the end either way.

Sports cars are not high end popular forms of travel/transportation. They are simply high end vehicles.

Reasonable metrics? So like because the majority of woman tend to find tall men sexier, that means all tall men are sexy at all times, period? Certainly doesn't sound reasonable. I wonder why tall men bother to bathe?



SecondWar said:
DonFerrari said:

About your last paragraph, there is a confirmed transwoman in the game, but not what people thought due to the leaks.

Do you mean Lev? He's a trans-man, not a trans-woman.

Anyway, what I have found silly about the reaction to him actually comes from some members of the trans-community. Apparently, the character has been criticised for begin written by non-trans writers. I didn't realise that was a pre-condition, even though they seem to have gone to great lengths to do a fair portrayal.

They also got criticised for having the Seraphites using Lev's birth name. To me, this is realistic, as a hardcore religious cult isn't going to try to be respectful to Lev. It might not be pleasant, especially for trans-people, but it is realistic.

Yes I mean Lev, and yes he would be transman. Still people that think Abby is trans very clearly didn't play the game and even try to impose they have a great knowledge of it.

And you are right about the second paragraph. If Lev was expelled from Seraphites and sister was hanged to die then of course they have 0 acceptance for him so it would be ludicrous to expect they to call him Lev.

EricHiggin said:
DonFerrari said:

Not really apple to apple.

AAA games aren't automatically popular because of the cost of production, but because they target mass market appeal (to pay for the cost of course is part of it), sure not all AAA games do that well in sales but they are designed for it. Exotic cars are designed to be limited in sales.

Minecraft is an odd title, there are very few titles that sell over 20M, so to say only over 20M is popular (or worse your case with Minecraft and 100M sales).

You are likely reaching with your comparison. You need to look at the industry, you have the best sellers, that on PS1 used to mean like over 100k sales and nowadays is over 1M. If you want to stretch it then perhaps 5M.

So it doesn't matter the reasonable metric you use, TLOU and TLOU2 are popular entertainment.

AAA games aren't the exotic cars of the gaming industry? What other types of games have more time and money spent on their development?

If you want to change it to sports cars, that's fine to. Maybe more realistic for you but it's the same result in the end either way.

Sports cars are not high end popular forms of travel/transportation. They are simply high end vehicles.

Reasonable metrics? So like because the majority of woman tend to find tall men sexier, that means all tall men are sexy at all times, period? Certainly doesn't sound reasonable. I wonder why tall men bother to bathe?

I guess you missed the point. It is about the public you want to reach and not how much you put in the development that define if something is popular or niche.

You are still trying to do big fallacies. You tried to use the biggest seller and say anything that doesn't sell like it isn't popular, how does that make any sense?



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