Dead By Daylight Should Just Go the Apex Legends Way
Apex Legends is easily leading the field right now, in my honest opinion, with representation done right. Upon release, they already had two confirmed LGBTQ+ characters. They didn't make that a selling point, they just simply exist and it is normal. As of now, they have 5 confirmed LGBTQ+ characters with the rest implied in some way, either bisexual, straight, pan, and etc by in-game interactions.
Apex doesn't leave a lot to just speculation, building their characters confidently and releasing them as (usually) fleshed out personalities. You wouldn't know in game at all (besides some new interactions). It is honestly impressive that before games had to start coming out publicly to announce they suddenly care, Apex was being diverse and creative as hell (and please let me know any other games that did the same, I'd love to see more examples!)
That being said, it honestly super helps to do two options: Make your characters (or a good portio) DEFINED, or leave them open to interpretation. Having defined personalities means everyone knows everyone and it helps not only with more representation, but it doesn't cause an outroar when you suddenly announce someone is LGBTQ+, because people usually find out in their lore on release. It doesn't have to be a huge deal either, again, they are a normal part of life. All Gibraltar has in his lore is "his boyfriend" and that is an easy representation if I've ever seen some.
Leaving it ambiguous is what DBD was doing for a while, meaning you can make whoever you want representation. They aren't all straight, they aren't all LGBTQ+. In fact, there are still people that consider Felix not straight, which he might not be, who knows, but by now officially revealing an identity, it is causing a backlash. Mainly through homophobic people lol but also because it wasn't organic at all. Think Blizzard with Soldier.
Ironically by revealing David was gay as a big announcement as the "first gay character in Dead By Daylight", David is in fact losing some of his character. Even if the tome it is written great and done well, by making it a big announcement, David is going to be known as the gay character, and sadly while trying to choose David to be the gay rep to avoid having a character be based around being gay, that is all that is associated with the David name.
After 6 years, it's better late than never, but I'm surprised it hasn't happened much sooner if it is something you take so seriously, seriously enough to collab to just write a character gay. Felix had lore that referenced wife and kids, it isn't a huge announcement, it is who he is. Dead by Daylight needs more of its characters actually explored if it is now something that is taken seriously. There are plenty of characters that are just ignored in terms of lore and cosmetics, and it would be a great opportunity to give those characters popularity while also giving yourself more credit.
Any representation is good representation as a friend said, just make it natural. It is always bound to be controversial but just making it natural like games like Apex has done usually leads it to be brushed off so easier.
TL;DR: DBD should have more characters explored naturally through their lore instead of keeping them as vague as they used to. Also maybe work on how you do announcements in a community noted for its toxicity lmao
Comments
100% agree.
In for a penny, in for a pound.
If they wanted to leave characters ambiguous and open to interpretation with very little divulged about their personal persuasions, that would have been more than fine.
Nobody really needs to know the romantic interests, religious ideologies, political views, and outspoken opinions of each character. But once that choice is made, now every character has to by hyper deep and refined - which I worry may weigh heavily on the already flustered devs.
It would have been a lot easier to simply say 'We will neither confirm nor deny the sexuality of our characters - have at it!' to the community, but now that they've set the stage - they're going to have to represent everyone and everything in every which way.
The Christian survivor, the Muslim survivor, the Pro-Choice survivor, the Neurodivergant survivor.
Now everyone needs to have representation - now every character needs to have the details of their romance and interpersonal convictions defined and exposed.
If one character's romantic interest in another man is worthy of tweets, confetti, and its own little community parade before it even comes out - are we supposed to do this with every other detail for future character development?
They already said a good while ago that while they initially subscribed to the theory of "we'll leave it up to your interpretation," the fact that they already had multiple characters in a heterosexual relationship was already straying far enough from that theory that they were no longer going to follow it.
So not sure why you seem to think that NOW is when they are dropping the ambiguity.
I find it worth a chuckle that the same people who are quick to defend the validity of David King's homosexuality in blatant spite of past heterosexual relationships are just as quick to use inferred past heterosexual relationships as some sort of profound statement of sexuality in other character lore.
In truth - it's really the two following things:
1.) Elements of history are not, by merit, current or relevant in totality. There is a great deal of ambiguity in the distance afforded by tomes, which allow characters to enjoy a certain affable disconnect from the current. Broad and sweeping sentiments lack the bite of specifics. Claudette can have lore that she loves plants and finds them amazing, and she uses them to survive. Would she burn down a forest to live, or is she a tree hugger that would rather die than harm a plant? It's ambiguous and understandably unimportant. While there can be some clues and gentle pushes, players are encouraged to take home their own leftovers on the topics.
2.) Moreover the announcement in totality. We should not shun people for their beliefs, but are we going to have a massive pro-religion announcement when the lore comes out that a character is mormon? Instead of insinuating that a character was raised in mormonism and may have been effected by their time in the church - making a very loud and public statement of their current beliefs and adherences to Mormon beliefs. The ambiguity is lost, the translation is lost, the comfort of a past life vs a current one is lost. More importantly, they have set the president that every minute change should be broadcasted on a loud speaker. "EVERYONE! THIS IS OUR FIRST NATIVE AMERICAN WOMAN!! WHAT AN ACCOMPLISHMENT!" while it certainly is a positive change, now every single change and addition must be followed with a push and extremely 'careful' foray into that subculture that is to be represented.
Nobody freaked out about Felix having a kid. Behavior wasn't grabbing the megaphone and screaming from the rooftops that the first confirmed hetero parent was in the game or anything - understandably so. And the status of his parenthood did not exclude him from certain interpretations. We've all seen the art - that kid does not dissuade the LGBT+ artists. The Devs never slammed a gavel down and said 'No, this man is a determined father who loves coffee and fell in love with his wife in college. He had to overcome his family instilled biases after his time in church and began to experiment with methe-" you get the idea.
Now, characters cannot be given ambiguity - nor the comfort of silence.
Now, each character's differences must be uncovered and proclaimed loudly.
That's a lot of work.
Hey, no one had a problem with David having a girlfriend. Why have a problem with David being gay?
? Who has a problem with him being gay?
Lots of people. Have you not looked at the forums?
None taken 🤗
I mean - generally, we really don't care about those people.
Hateful and childish people will always exist in this world - they aren't worth our time or energy.
But I mean, I don't remember insinuating that there was a problem with David being homosexual in my original comment
Unfortunately, some hateful and childish people aren't content simply being ignored. So simply saying "who cares about those people?" is simply ignoring a problem that exists and allowing it to hurt others.
They did but they also never actually confirmed any heterosexual characters. Which characters are you thinking of that had big announcements saying they are straight? None from what I remember. In fact, even though Felix was stated to have a wife and kids, that did not stop a single person from still assuming he could still be far from straight. It wasn't confirmed anywhere. Hell, even David had an ex-girlfriend in his lore and he is now the first confirmed homosexual character.
The fact of the matter is now, the way DBD went along with their reveal, it is setting them in a bad position where they really need to start actually fleshing out their stories and characters. Which really sucks, because DBD doesn't have a good track record of doing anything not half-assed. Mikaela had a forced characterization, and I fear more come NOW with attached half-assed representations.
It isn't hard to just write a good character, but seeing as BHVR needed to collab?? just to write a gay character after 6 years, it isn't looking that way lol. Felix had a wife and kids in his lore, how hard was it to at some point just say "Dwight hung out with his boyfriend between work"?
I'm not speaking generally - I'm speaking of the context of the conversation we were having.
I don't remember talking about people having a problem with his homosexuality, so you bringing it up caught me off guard because it seemed both slightly accusatory and completely beside the point.
Well, I'm speaking generally, so we're kinda just not on the same page, then.
BHVR was clearly not interested in mentioning David's homosexuality as a token gesture as many other pieces of media are known to do. They actively wanted to make it a focus, which is something that does require a certain amount of care if you're not as well-versed in the subject. That can very much result in wanting to look toward outside assistance if you don't want risk doing a really bad job representing the subject matter. It's strange to me that actively seeking help over a sensitive subject matter is seen as "half-assing it" when the alternative you are seeing seems to be to just casually tossing in a reference in passing and then calling it a day.