I get that people want an LGBT character, but...
Why?
Let me preface by saying I'm not LGBT-phobic or spreading hate speech or anything, I'm just stating my opinion.
If a character is made ONLY to be LGBT and that's their WHOLE personality, then it wouldn't be a good addition, neither would cheesily integrating it into a character's current lore.
WHY does it matter if there's an LGBT character? Why do we need one? What's the point? "oH hEY gUys, wE aDdeD An LGBT cHaRIcTer." I don't care who my character is, I just want the gameplay to be good.
There just isn't a reason.
Thank you for coming to my very short TED talk.
Edit: there is a follow up on the 5th page of comments. Please look there as well.
Comments
Want to. I'm sorry if you think people like you are unwanted.
I mean i dont have nothing with that communiry but just image the hate will come with, bullying in game and in chat will be huge, my opinion is like any caracter can have his orientation like meg he probably is but we dont know, tbh all those years i was thinking Nea was somehow a boi.
That already happens with black characters. Should we kowtow to racists too and remove black characters so they don't throw a hissy fit?
Exactly this. If it was made to make money, it is probably pandering in some way, especially in capitalist economy. I never saw people complaining about Silent Hill pandering, or SAW pandering. It's only pandering, apparently, if it's towards LGBTQ+ people.
Excluding LGBT chars will not prevent bullying. People use names that include anything LGBT and get tunneled and harassed for it. Those bullies will get banned.
the devs admitted their inclusion of straight relations but exclusion of anything LGBT was pretty much a broken state that they WANT to fix. Let the devs do what they want, it won’t harm you in any way.
if you really want it specifically excluded but everything else shall be included nontheless (like hetero relationships) it kind of says gay people/lgbt people are not normal.
they should just be treated normally and that’s it. No special attention or anything. And up to this point they didn’t get any special attention in DbD. There was just this one short Twitter statement that they won’t get excluded anymore.
Excuse me but can we be best friends now because that was badass.
I'm not saying gay people should be excluded from all things, just not the opposite either. This push by the very vocal, woke types to have gay people in everything pulp culture is only going to cause the gay community to become more polarized. Stop.
These same arguments were (and still are) used against having representation for black people, women, etc.
no, ‚gay people‘ need to be included everywhere to the point where it really feels normal if a gay character is introduced somewhere.
as long as inclusion will make People scream things like ‚woke‘ there is work needed to be done. You don’t view gay people as normal people. Or any other LGBT people for that matter. And that is a problem.
In fact I'm sure there are some cool designs that could be made with a disability at the center of it.
Blind or deaf killer is an easy go to.
that mobile DbD ‚rip off‘ has different survivor abilities and one of them is actually blind! That concept is really really cool
It was licensed btw. Also many survivor's power's are dependant on items that you can also find on chests. I do think that survivors in DbD should be more than just skins though...
Seems like you ignored the "not all" part, but hey, whatever helps you make your point. : - /
I really don't see anyway where each survivor has a unique trait/power without a meta forming and invalidating a large portion of them.
Except for one idea I have: You get 1 random perk from their teachable in addition to whatever 4 you run. Can be the same perk you're running in your build so you can't cheese a free perk by running the other 2. Still creates a meta but at least it's RNG.
Yeah it would have been a cool concept but it’s just such a fundamental change to the core game mechanics that it’s not feasible at this point anymore.
That's a nice idea! I didn't actually think of just adding a power to each survivor but more of a base kit feature that could make them unique to their lore. I'd say either what you suggested or maybe like a small bonus. For example; Claudette is based on healing, so why not make Claudette's base healing speed 10% faster than any other survivor, but her generator repairing speed slower?
Thanks! But the reason they're not touching number passives like that is because even though it is just a small advantage it's better than say David's potential bonus being crawl 10% faster. There's almost no comparison between which is a better one to have, and now you're at a disadvantage if you personally don't want to play as that survivor with the best/most useful passive.
Now something like 3% might work. It would encourage picking the most optimal one but at such a small number it shouldn't affect the balance too much.
It's people like you that have to shove your ridiculous agendas down everyone's throats that causes the bitterness with the LGBT community.
The "ridiculous agenda" of not treating LGBT people differently?
What causes the "bitterness" is bad faith actors and outspoken homophobes. Wanting equal treatment isn't a good reason for this.
Which ridiculous agenda is that? That gay people are normal people?
you are just bitter because you choose to, not because I am making you. Why do you feel in any way attacked?
Both you and Mooks are cut from the same cloth. You both think that if gay people aren't seen everywhere, despite being a significantly small % of the population, that everyone is homophobic. You seriously are both blights on the lgbt community.
No, that's something you imagined we think, with no basis in reality.
If you want to go by percentages, then white people - and Americans in particular - are over represented in DbD.
you want to exclude anything ‚gay‘ from certain media. That’s your agenda it seems and it’s a pretty hateful one.
my ‚ridiculous‘ agenda is just that I don’t want to see people from the LGBT+ community treated differently just because of their identity/sexuality.
i did not say there needs to be at least one gay character in every video game. But generally, video games that already include several straight characters shouldn’t explicitly exclude LGBT when there is no other reason to it.
In a game with so many diverse survivors at it is, at least one of them is likely to be gay. In fact, I'm fairly certain at one point in the past the developers confirmed that an existing character was already gay. For people who ask 'Why does it matter?' :
Did it matter when David was confirmed to have an ex girlfriend?
Did you care when Ace was referred to as a womaniser?
Were you questioning Dwight's implied crush on his female co-worker?
Did you hate Julie and Frank's relationship?
How did you react to Felix's straight romance?
Odds are, you didn't care. Understandably, because it's just an additional aspect of a character. The (straight) romance is arguably the biggest theme of Legion's lore! So then why does the simple confirmation or inclusion of a LGBT character become such an issue? Following the pride month announcement, threads questioning why exactly a LGBT character should be introduced have been popping up constantly. My response to it is, why not? At this point, BHVR keeps having decent enough opportunities to add in some inclusion, and keep it out, which is why alot of people are now more passionately asking for some. For one example, perhaps Nea's environmentalist friend could have been a girlfriend, as surely the huge bearing she had on Nea's worldview would have made more sense.
Making an existing character LGBT will likely happen in a tome, and I doubt it will even be a huge aspect of that specific tome. But to many, that representation will be super impact, and that is the point. Even if a new character is LGBT, obviously that won't be their only character trait, and if you think as such then that says alot about your personal views. People see Felix as an architect, not the man who was about to settle down with his girlfriend, so if an LGBT character were to be added it would be no different.
Youre’re mütter? lol
Thanks for listening to my TED Talk.
How dare people want representation!
Why do some people define their entire selves by their sexuality? Like they, as a person, are nothing but what they define as their sex or sexual preferences? Trans I can understand because that is different than something like being gay, but the reality is a lot of people these days are really just getting tired of the massive amounts of people wanting to have this type of sexuality, this type of race, this type of that.
Like, I would rather have the ability to play an elf, or an orc, not just another human that's got different colored skin and likes the same gender. Besides, why would you want a character and their lore to say that they might be bisexual? Like, unless that character has specific, you know, clothing, or trinkets, or things that show that type of thing, then it seems a big empty to have a little spot in their bio saying it.
I have quite a big problem with the really ######### goalposts you set up here:
If new character is introduced who is a number of things, one of them happening to be that they are gay, that is the single feature the forums will focus on. There will be posts about how 1 note the character is and how people feel they're having an 'agenda' pushed into the game regardless of what is actually there.
This won't be their whole personality, but people like you will treat it like it is.
On the other hand if one of the existing characters is revealed to be gay (since the sexuality of most characters hasn't been revealed this is in no way a contradiction or something that is shoehorned in), then it's something being 'cheesily integrated'.
Both are entirely viable routes and both should be pursued- there are so many facets to LGBT+ experiences that it would be wasted potential to leave it at 1 and done.
At any rate you're going to take issue with either method if introduction for a very obvious reason: despite your protests you are very clearly opposed to LGBT inclusion.
So according to you we should only have statistically accurate representation in everything?
Hope you're ok with seeing a lot more diverse casts including gay people because straight white population is set to become a minority in the global population buddy.
https://infogram.com/race-of-the-world-population-1go502yg18k62jdhttps://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/visualization/lgbt-stats/?topic=LGBT&compare=percentage#comparison
Who exactly defines themselves solely by their sexuality? That not even a thing for trans people. But good thing you would understand that...
i was at first say that from the moment you say "but", you didn't really get why.
And about your follow up, here is where I disagree: representation is important. As many already have said, it may not seem important to you, probably because you already have characters that represent you in this and many other games (and i'll focus on the probably).
Anyway, I personally would love to see a transgender character in the game. It will be there simply stating the fact the these people exist. It may mean nothing to you, but to us it means the world just to be seem - acknowledging our existance -, not hidden as many people would like it to be (and as they like in real life too, pretending we don't exist or reducing our existance to a single extent), just as other kinds of affection lores are inside every game.
This isn't hate speech or me being rude, this is basic biology.
Too basic, in fact. "New" research has shown structural and chemical differences between male and female brains. In trans individuals, someone chromosomically XX has an "XY brain" (to some degree) and vice-versa.
You're thinking of intersex conditions, which I didn't mention and are not relevant. I'm talking about actual, measurable differences between XX and XY brains and how XX trans individuals have XY brains (again, to some degree) and vice-versa.
There's been a lot of research into the subject, more than any of us were taught in high school biology.
I didn't. I just said that it doesn't make sense to say you are part of the last generation in the first sentence and than "not all of the younger generation" in your second sentence. Those a contradictory statements, you are either the last or you're not.
It would have been a different case if you would have said something like "I am part of the last generation were common sense was widespread as opposed to the younger generation were common sense is very rare."
I wouldn't agree with this statement either but atleast it would have been coherent.
But since you mentioned making a point: Interesting that you only commented on my admittedly a bit nitpicky phrasing critic, but ignored my other points.
No arguments against them?
However many there are, the fact is that they do exist. Transgenderism is a scientifically proven thing, whether you want to admit it or not.
You stated the obvious in your post, and I speak from a western perspective (North America). To cover every single factor with regard to what contributes to a lot of business decisions (where inclusion and this game is concerned) would extend my post far beyond a reasonable size. I'll be honest, I'm not going to spend days going back and forth in this thread with you over literally nothing, since I don't care that much. My points were pretty simple and easy to understand, you either agree with them or you don't. Sorry (not sorry) to say I'm not here to debate with you, as I covered my bases. Anything else is just semantics at this point. Take from that what you will.
Well, it's pointless for me to say anything else. Even the terminology you try to make it literal to prove a point isn't even there.
I'll just say it's not about "you", it's about someone else. So YOU may not see the need of it, but not everything in life is about me or about you. And there's no reason to not representate the variety life has just because somebody from outside thinks so.
Actually, it shouldn't even matter to you, but somehow it does.
Anyway, we both said enough. It's a game forum, and I'm not really expecting much from our "era" of gamers. Maybe the next ones if we make the right choices. Don't know. But we'll see (or maybe not).
Thank you for reading.
I do have a question tho. Why do you care so much about what traits a character has? If it doesn't matter, then why make a thread on it? Them adding lgbt characters in good ways isn't hurting anyone (except homophobes).
So I don't understand why you care so much. I saw you argue against the "why not" argument. And I say the same thing, why not? If you aren't homophobic (which I'm not accusing you of) then why DON'T you want lgbt characters?
Anyone who would ask "Why is representation important?" clearly is represented all the time in the media, games and environment in which they reside. Because it has been stated and documented and harped on for years, in essence my entire life, that equal representation is extremely important for people to feel like a member of a community. In this case the DbD community.
I'm lgbt and I agree that this game doesnt need an lgbt character.
That's true, just like the game didn't need non-LGBT characters. The devs are adding one because they want to and many fans appreciate it.
What's important is subjective, though. So, you can totally say that representation isn't important to you, but you can also clearly see that it is important to others. So, your question is really, "Why should the game include content that isn't important to me?" and the answer is "Because it's important to other people, both on the dev team and in the player base."
If that answer doesn't satisfy you, I think it's possible that this thread is less about you not understanding why someone would put LGBT characters in the game and more about you not wanting LGBT characters in the game, for whatever reason.