Mooks
Mooks
About
- Username
- Mooks
- Joined
- Visits
- 22,563
- Last Active
Comments
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2935312#Comment_2935312
Nice to know you're happy about your representation in DBD while the rest of us have to sit and wait wondering if the survivors we play are going to suddenly be trans.
And where would be a problem with that? You are also waiting and wondering if your survivors play a specific instrument or not, engaged in some specific sports, had specific jobs (in some cases we don’t know, in some we do).
that was always part of DbDs story telling.
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2935477#Comment_2935477
This is my concern with gaming these days but it seems to be a brushed off opinion. Video games are slowly transitioning into representation simulators and mediums of social statements. Remember when the BLM stuff was going on. I couldn't log onto anything without getting that crap shoved in my face.
Nothing about the gameplay changed. Heterosexual relationships and straight characters were shoved in everyones faces in videogames since the early days of their existence. And you did say nothing about that.
-
@bluedusef said:
I thought we played video games for fun. ohh yeah its 2022 my bad.......
Wait… how is the game not fun anymore due to this?
-
@Brokenbones said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2935357#Comment_2935357
That's not my point whatsoever
My point is the charms are currently optional and BHVR puts the decision in the hands of the player whether they want them or not. I don't see what's so wrong with that?
Maybe some people just aren't interested, so they don't redeem the codes.
To be fair, they would still remain to be optional to use and charms are being added through rifts either way so two charms more is really not that big of a deal..
-
@SuzuKR said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2935343#Comment_2935343
Bigots having to deal with it or quit? Sounds like a win in my book.
well. Actually. Yeah, I would be okay with that :)
-
There would be people complaining about it and probably some would state they aren’t capable of playing the game anymore. It’s okay for the charms to be optional, the codes will never expire so if they see the charms and want them they can easily find out about the codes.
-
I need to cope when you are the one being mad?
i got LGBTQ+ rep in DbD. I am fairly happy with the current situation :)
-
@Kweh said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2935203#Comment_2935203
Corporate pandering and you idiots eat it up believing an entity that probably only cares about money and shareholders cares about you and representing you? If they actually cared it wouldn't be so lazy and half-arsed. This company doesn't care about its playerbase, much less as an extension, sub-groups in it's playerbase. It's more face saving business talk we've seen a thousand times before by companies.
No one believes the entity cares? Everybody knows the entity is not real…
it’s not lazy nor is it half-assed either. That’s just a lazy and half-assed argument against representation.
the employees of this company, those that are creating the characters and story’s, DO care. That’s what matters here. And the company is not preventing representation or support of the LGBTQ+ community. You really have no basis for anything you are blubbering there.
-
@Sludge said:
Can you just reveal every survivor's sexuality now and save everyone the trouble
I don't feel like getting surprised again a year later
Can you not try to force them to do something that’s not in line with their approach of story telling?
you can assume that every character other than David can have any sexuality - just like you would with people in real life. You shouldn’t get surprised by the reveal when nothing was ever confirmed before anyways.
-
@CORENdot said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934780#Comment_2934780
Not going to fall for that. Read below.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934791#Comment_2934791
As you seem to be quoting me with allusions towards things i never said or share and also adding negative connotations in your responses, i think it is time to wrap things up.
- Hinting not being a neccessity for me is a fantastic statement, thank you for telling me what i need. I guess the same that David being the choice was also not needed by anyone?
- A player might not have asked for hints about other characters due to not having the same or even no emotional attachment towards them.
- Emotional attachment is not only applicable to a single sexuality...
- If David sexuality was revealed two years ago, which i don't know, it would still have been years since their initial lore... years without revealing a game character sexuality or hinting it and out of a sudden doing it does indeed feel rushed and unnecessary knowing another character had to eventually come. Want to ask this one again?
- About being shallow, incapable of, having a problem with my attitude... you nailed it there, please explain how someone should be cappable of changing how something feels for them? And in favor of what exactly, your perception of which feelings are shallow or not?
Depending on the nature of your response i might just leave it here.
Of course David being the choice wasn’t needed. But it was a great choice as it fits very well with the lore we already have.
you are still focusing only on sexuality. If emotional attachment is applicable to other things then why is no one ever using this argument when it’s not about LGBTQ+? Because even for the tomes that actually retconned initial lore there wasn’t as much criticism or complaints.
You are trying to set limitations on the story telling of the devs by stating they can’t reveal the sexuality of their characters after some time of their initial release, but the way tomes work that’s just not possible. Also it wasn’t out of a sudden, they have talked about their collaboration with GaymerX often times and never have they explicitly stated the representation will be done with a new character.
i used the word shallow because you are focusing only on the sexuality of the character while completely leaving out anything that actually defines the character. Thinking the character itself somehow changed because their sexuality was revealed (and not changed) is shallow.
-
@cozeeekitten said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/320679/new-pride-charm-pride2022
Is anyone else having trouble getting the charm? I type in the code and I don’t receive the charm
You have to click the ‚Redeem‘ button directly, pressing enter only closes the window where you can type in the code without redeeming it now..
-
@GentlemanFridge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934917#Comment_2934917
I'm not making another thread.
The david one has been taking over my notifications for the last week and frankly I'm tired.
… am sorry!
.. nah not really.
as to your other comment, I think you can disable notifications if you navigate to your profile - edit profile - notification preferences. Not sure if you can disable notifications for only one of your discussions or only for all at once
-
@CORENdot said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934136#Comment_2934136
It could have been premeditated from day 1.
How many years have players been without even a hint? How is that good character development?
If it takes months to develop a new character, how it is not rushing in comparison?
Don't downplay emotional attachment to a character, i have mentioned it a few times for you to imply there was nothing to be attached in the first place.
Last time, many players could feel Identified as David than now can't. Yes sexuality-wise. Yes matters to probably more than are wiling to voice it.
Do you find that to be nothing?
They are already limiting themselves by acting based on social controversy (Peanits comment), which is far worse due to alienating the portion of the playerbase that grew attachment to pre-reveal David over all those years...
wait, have I responded to this yet? Anyways..
You don’t need a hint, you haven’t asked for hints for any other tome story which also were released way after the release of the character. This is part of DbDs story telling. If you have a problem with that then you can of course express your criticism, but it’s very suspicious that so many people only ever have a problem with it when it’s LGBTQ+ related, don’t you think?
and again: how is 2 years (=24 months) compared to 9-12 months rushed?
as to emotional attachment: if you are so shallow to be influenced by the characters sexuality being revealed when there hasn’t been a hint towards it in any way that’s completely on you and not BHVRs problem or mistake. Nothing changed about David King. He is still the very same character he used to be.
there won’t ever be a character who a player can completely identify with. If you can identify with a muscular ex-rugby player who was abandoned by his rich family and now punches people for a living you can also identify with a gay muscular ex-rugby player who was abandoned by his rich family and now punches people for a living and if you are incapable of that then there is something wrong with your attitude.
and as to Peanits comment: they were limiting themselves for their first LGBTQ+ representation. Now they are done with that milestone they have stated there can (and will) be more coming.
-
@CORENdot said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934664#Comment_2934664
Characters are players' Avatars within the digital environment.
They still have definitive traits especially in DbDs case and that since the very beginning. No one cared that Claudette was a botanist, Jake was Korean, Nurse had a husband she dearly loved, Frank and Julie were a sexually actively couple (which was only added in their tome story and not part of the initial lore) etc. It’s only when it’s LGBTQ+ related that some people suddenly have a problem with it. But they also can never really state what the actual problem is.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934626#Comment_2934626
No you're wanting me to contradict myself because you think it'll prove some kinda point. I've already stated how I feel about this and I'm pretty much done with it now unless you keep replying to me about it. Yes I do think it was weird he was randomly chosen to be gay. I also think they should leave it up to the players to decide what they want each character to be. It is their characters though so they can do what they want with them. I just think it would be a lot less controversial if they just did it without making such a big deal about it. But overall my stance is why bother doing it to begin with? Let everyone be happy with their imaginations of fictional characters they love.
I mean, you are also always replying to me and you can just stop with that as well.
As to imaginations: as I said that’s not really completely open since Nurse. And you can still imagine anything you want even if it is not in line with the canon lore. No one is limiting you. In the end, even fictional characters can have established determined traits, features etc. that’s what makes them characters instead of avatars.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934604#Comment_2934604
Take out the whole representation narrative and they can make the entire roster gay for all I care.
But you already explicitly stated that you think David shouldn’t have been ‚randomly chosen‘ to be gay. You are starting to contradict yourself.
so it’s literally only the twitter announcement and website blog which you have a problem with? Because if so… then maybe state so from the beginning. That’s completely understandable and is also only been done because of previous official statements by the devs
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934590#Comment_2934590
I don't think they should reveal their sexuality at all. And you're right! They probably didn't right straight either on his concept art and you know what? That is perfect! It should've stayed that way.
So it would have been okay to tell a story about David starting to date men after he only dated women to please his parents? Though they never use the word gay.
because.. that’s in line with how heterosexual relationships were part of the lore since Nurse was added and pretty much no one complained.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934525#Comment_2934525
If I had to take a wild guess or give my opinion on David King I would say I highly doubt "possibly gay" or "gay" was one of the things written on the concept art paper when he was being designed. You know no one would be complaining about this or criticizing it had they made him gay from the start or even early on in DBD. A lot of people see this as pandering or tokenism.
They probably didn’t write ‚straight‘ either, so that argument doesn’t help in any way. A lot of people would see a new character being gay as pandering and tokenism and there would be more basis for that argumentation than it is for David.
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934510#Comment_2934510
Its not necessary to mention they are straight either. My stance is leave it up to the consumer to decide what they want each character to be. If someone wants to believe the entire roster is gay, so what? Let them. Also when I said I will assume the rest are straight that was me wondering why they haven't come out and said it yet especially for the older characters. Why wait? Why not come out and tell us what the sexuality of a few other survivors are now? Or are we supposed to be left in the dark about characters we know and love for a long time now? Why does this have to be about representation instead of just telling a story about a fictional character?
They have revealed it WITH the release of the tome where it is an integral part of the story, you realize this, yeah? They didn’t just go ‚oh by the way David is gay lol‘ like Rowling did with Dumbledore. They have written and revealed the story - and this is their actual normal kind of story telling! There have been 10 tomes already and I’m each of them at least for 2 existing characters they have revealed story’s which added and expanded upon the backstory.
asking to reveal any characters sexuality would feel forced and doesn’t have any relevance to their normal take on story telling. For some characters it may be revealed later on, for some it will only be indirect through mentioned relationships and for some sexuality may never be written about at all. That has been the approach kn DbD since the beginning.
and just to be clear: stating you would want everyone left open and therefore you didn’t like David’s reveal is completely understandable and valid criticism (though with multiple heterosexual relationships there could have still be a homosexual relationship mentioned without outright saying he is gay - would you have had a problem with that for David?)
also something worth noting: have you ever heard of someone that is heterosexual that they officially revealed it about themselves? Be it for family, friends, at work, in public? It’s something that straight people usually don’t do so it would feel very forced if suddenly someone came out as straight. While for gay people (or LGBTQ+ people) it’s sadly quite the norm that it is almost expected for them to come out. Otherwise people will just assume they are straight..
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934466#Comment_2934466
Reception matters too when things like this happen. Yea people are receiving it well and others aren't. When people say this feels random or it doesn't sit well with them they are being honest about that. When people from the very community you're trying to represent are not receiving this well that tells me theres a problem with it. It also tells me not everyone in that community thinks alike and criticism from them is a good thing. Everything does not fit well with this. I can promise you I am not the only one who if asked if they think David King is gay before this happened would undoubtedly say no. There just was nothing there over the years to imply this about him. There are reasons why this doesn't make sense to a lot of people. Be reasonable and try to understand how this does not fit well and does in fact feel very random.
Criticism that is constructive and has a basis other than ‚I Don’t like it‘ or ‚my head canon contradicts this‘ is completely valid and necessary.
but…
I can promise you I am not the only one who if asked if they think David King is gay before this happened would undoubtedly say no. There just was nothing there over the years to imply this about him.
this! This kind of thinking is one of the reasons representation outside of stereotypes matters so much! You can say you don’t like it all you want and I don’t care, but if your reasoning is you couldn’t tell David was gay before than you are showing that they definitely did the right thing and your criticism has no basis.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2934302#Comment_2934302
He had a girlfriend. He was straight until they just made him gay. If they made Julie gay, then it would be the same thing.
People like you are the reason why we need representation like David. You can’t grasp the thought of a gay man having had a relationship with a girl in their past and you are desperately clinging to this statement (which you admitted you didn’t even know about the first time you said David was straight).
Educate yourself. And read David’s tome lore. Then come back and try to give actual arguments against David’s reveal. Because as of yet others were able to give arguments but you are just like a stubborn child that can’t accept they were wrong about something.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933809#Comment_2933809
Very well said. I've notice this is how a lot of people feel about it. It seems like every time something like this happens it must be presented as some bold thing that must be admired and respected as such. This felt completely random. It didn't feel genuine at all. Its like the opportunity to not just do it but announce you're doing it must be done so all eyes on you can see how much you care about what you did. If someone wants to make a gay video game character then make a gay video game character. Don't act like you did some great act of representation for doing so.
feels random
but it isnt. They made a deliberate choice and they needed almost two years to decide which is their first rep. They had consultants at their side. And we just don’t know if David has always been supposed to be gay or not.
It didn’t feel genuine […] they announced it
They announced it as a follow up to the announcement of them not further excluding LGBTQ+ topics and the announcement of collaborating with GaymerX. It wouldn’t feel genuine if they completely stayed silent after those announcements. You can say that it would have felt better if they waited until the whole story was available to the playerbase in-game and the timing of the announcement just makes it feel not genuine. But an announcement was already to be expected since June 2020.
don’t act like those arguments would determine if the representation was done well or not. Judge the story, judge the character. And there, surprisingly, everything fits well.
-
@CORENdot said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933519#Comment_2933519
Thank you.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933593#Comment_2933593
No one said it, but it's hard not to interpretate it due to some responses i got.
Peanits comment is not much different than what i have been seeing here. I agree to avoiding social controversy as i can assume negative impact on BHVR.
Yet i fail to see which was the rush. A new character could have been slowly or differently developt, maybe with hints about possible sexuality or a short term reveal.
Definetly an abrupt announcement doesn't feel like the best course of action to avoid controversy on the first place either.
Emotional attachment to digital characters is an interesting subject, you might want to take a look at it.
Which rush are you referring to?
they announced in June 2020 that there will be no further exclusion of LGBTQ+ topics. We know a complement new character needs around 9-12 months of preparation/work before release. Tome story’s should not need much longer as there is more lore but many things as perks, character model etc already exist. The GaymerX collaboration was also announced long ago (I think it’s been over a year).
there has not been any rush. They deliberately chose David King with very likely plenty of discussions if they should start with a new or existing character. And it was and still is a possibility for other existing characters to get tome story’s about their sexual orientation/identity. This one is just a milestone as the first.
and attachment to what? David King has never been confirmed to not be gay. Head canon is and stays head canon and should not limit the creators in what they want to do with their characters. You can of course criticize their execution, but let’s be honest here: the story is well written, especially compared to other tome stories.
-
@Youko said:
As an LGBTQ person, I don't know if this will ever sit quite right with me. But I only speak for myself, as an individual of this community, so these are my thoughts. Feel free to take them or leave them.
On the positive side, I appreciate the explanation and thought that was put into it. I think self-discovery after living a certain way makes for good character development. It's also great to consult about LGBTQ experiences.
On the negative side, if it wasn't your intentions for the character at the outset, I don't think it can ever be truly genuine. Having the equivalent of a "coming out announcement" also seems strange and placating. In my eyes, the best representation simply exists without pomp and circumstance.
On the REALLY negative side, David King is not the "first LGBTQIA2+ character" in the game and the fact that this is missed is actually kind of devastating. The "I" in the full acronym used in the announcement stands for "intersex." If you've read Koji Suzuki's Ring novel you would know that Sadako Yamamura is in-fact intersex, as revealed at the climax of the story when Kazuyuki Asakawa and Ryuji Takayama discover the origins of the curse with Sadako's death at the hands of Dr. Nagao (referenced in Part 3, Ch. 11). The film adaptations favored erasure of Sadako's intersex identity, an integral part of the novel's depiction of Sadako as a proxy for the AIDs pandemic, and themes of trans panic and homophobia (though the book is a product of its time/cultural climate and thus such elements were presented negatively in the context of the story).
This was really a missed opportunity to return to the source material of the Ring and present Sadako as the face LGBTQIA2+ inclusiveness being sought and helping to restore her image as the intersex character that she is.
First of all: your negative side is the first time it’s formulated in a respectful and valid way. I have to disagree as tomes are in general always adding new experiences, struggles, relationships, etc to a character but i still see where you are coming from.
on Sadako: I think they meant first original created LGBTQIA2+ character by BHVR. Otherwise we do have next to Sadako also Chatterer and the CryptTV monsters/characters as legendary characters as well. But it’s worth noting in these topics anyways!
-
@CluelessWanderer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933213#Comment_2933213
Dude, what are you arguing? I'm personally happy with David. Love his new shirt. + shades.
But it was implied he was heterosexual. A developer specifically wrote a very detailed post that they decided to make David gay because out of all the existing (free) survivors, it seemed the best fit. Which meant he was never originally intended to be gay or perhaps, like most survivors, he was at the most ambiguous with heterosexual implications (I think this might be your point? Correct me if I'm wrong, but maybe you're saying the fact that many survivors lore being ambiguous and having no confirmed sexual orientation means no revisions happened?). Regardless, they added to his lore and took it in a different direction. Fantastic (for me).
My point is, all of this is very dependent on people's interpretation of David. It's OK to have different interpretations. For some, him having a g/f heavily influenced their assumptions. Thus. some might find it a bit of a revision to an existing character, and in that way, see it as 'forced inclusion"; and that does not make them in any way homophobic. They're just processing it. And there's a discussion to be had. As I said earlier in the thread, for BHVR it was a Catch 22. If they made a new survivor that was DLC then they would be accused of cashing in on the rainbow and chasing after the gay $$.
If these players suddenly said; " Well screw this! I'm never playing David again! IEW.". That's different and granted, I might side-eye somewhat. My whole point, is that everyone criticizing the release of this is not automatically a bigoted twat.
I never said anything of the likes that somebody or you specifically were a bigoted twat or homophobic or anything.
yes my point was only that he was always left ambiguous, and him being revealed as gay isn’t a retcon it the actual literal sense. Or any addition of lore through tomes can be considered retcons and then… why only ever mention this when it’s LGBTQ+ related?
and assuming someone can’t be gay because they had a heterosexual relationship is kinda ‚latent homophobic‘? Sorry i can’t express this term in English but i don’t mean it’s kn any way due to actual hatred but it’s actually a very good example of how this kind of representation is important and why David is a great choice after all! This is a story of David finding out himself who he is and going through phases and having to with his and his families struggles with the fact that he is gay.
the devs are always for any new story looking at a char and ‚randomly‘ decide new stuff they add. This is part of their story writing. But we also know that they have created one of their original survivors with being LGBTQ+ in mind while not revealing who that is. And chances are, this could have been David all along and the girlfriend (which iirc was mentioned in a tome around the time they made that statement about inclusion) could have very well be always intended to be for him what we now know.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933052#Comment_2933052
I still don't care.
At least you have humour I guess.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932846#Comment_2932846
If it were me, I'd find it odd to make a character gay when i myself had no intention of making them gay beforehand. I'd make a new character instead of randomly making them gay to have more representation in my media. Whether I can expand their lore to make it make sense or not.
I also am not a fan of unnecessary romantic plot points. Straight or gay. Another game I played had that and I just didn't like it, felt forced and it was a straight one too.
You don’t know if there was intention for him being gay before or not. You are just assuming he must have been straight, but that’s your head canon.
they haven’t chosen David randomly. They have discussed their choices and decided for David as they thought it was fitting.
romantic plots there have been since Nurse‘s release. If you never complained before about it don’t start now when it’s finally not a heterosexual relationship. That seems suspicious.
-
@CORENdot said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933195#Comment_2933195
Well we ended agreeing that it was not necessary to be David, which is more than i could have asked for.
Bear in mind that David sexuality not being specified was representative of more sexualities before than now.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933216#Comment_2933216
There is no single argument there on why David is better choice than a new character.
I encourage you to take a deep breath before answering, you are not debating with someone who is gonna fall for provocations.
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933296#Comment_2933296
Even if you might be biased i understand that you might like the anticipation of a character that represents not only your sexuality but your story around it.
This is in essence what i'm refeering to, there might be people out there that were not Gay that could relate to David until this point aswell.
Attachment to the fictional character.
No one ever said it was necessary that it was David. But Peanits comment also speaks for itself, there are not that many free original characters and the way they have written it it’s very well and natural, incorporating past lore and tying in loose ends.
could of course have happened with another free character and could have ended as good as with David. But chances are those that are now complaining about David would just complain about any other character as well.
also we may have less representative potential for David, but more definitive representation in the whole game. And these are not avatars, we have fully fleshed out characters, with story’s already told and many story’s yet to be told.
-
@Sludge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933284#Comment_2933284
I know, I told them I switched to Jeff and it made some people angry.
I'm not even complaining(much) about the huge loss of time invested into farming for David, or the wasted money on cosmetics. Just pushing back against the narrative that no harm was done with this decision.
No one was angry because you said you switched the character.
what people pointed out is how you were acting up like you do now: wasted money on cosmetic? Really? Nothing about David’s appearance changed at all. He is still the very same character and nothing was changed about him.
-
@CluelessWanderer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933203#Comment_2933203
No it's not an "objective fact".
He was a character that was never even implied to be gay, and the developers themselves looked at the list of existing survivors (as Peanits said in a post) and decided David was the one they could reasonably include. Again, I'm totally on board, so I'm not going to argue about it. Not everyone is going to agree with absolutely everything 100% of the time. Doesn't make them them bad people.
Anyways, god I'm so over this. Have a good day.
It was also never confirmed that he wasn’t gay, was it?
you do realize how writing new lore for an existing character works, right? There have been many tome story’s all adding new stuff to existing character, some even ret-conning things from the initial backstory. But it seems like all of that is okay but as soon as a character whose sexual orientation wasn’t confirmed gets confirmed to be not straight it’s somehow ret-conning and bad?
-
@CluelessWanderer said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933074#Comment_2933074
I use the word "woke".
I'm gay. I was surprised they ret-conned David, but now that I see his new cosmetic, I'm totally on board (I'm shallow that way) and currently leveling him lol. In the end, I'm actually glad they chose him because he doesn't look like a mish-mash of gay stereotypes.
I think of the term "woke" not as people who are liberal and progressive (which is usually good). It refers to extreme neo-liberalism over classic liberalism.
In this context, it would be accusing everyone who isn't ecstatic about this change as carte blanche hating gay people when in fact, they probably don't. I've seen people who would have had no problem with a new character being gay, just didn't like changing an existing one, yet they are still accused of homophobia which is not cool. Not everyone with criticism (so long as it is non-destructive) is auto-homophobic.
"Woke" refers to the type of people who claim to be "right side of history" when they have a tendency to weaponize the progressive stack against those they believe to be lower on it than they are. Just muh opinion.
David revealed as being gay is not a ret-conn and is not changing the character.
that is an objective fact.
-
@CORENdot said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933015#Comment_2933015
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933026#Comment_2933026
Similar opinions there, you both composed your answers with better rather than necessary. (Found that interesting)
Neither of you mentions any negative aspect on the reveal yet,
What happens to players that felt David as their choice to represent themselves as?
necessary was only some kind of inclusion of an LGBTQ+ character because of what they have said before and how they have treated I LGBTQ+ topics different to heterosexual topics.
There is not much negative going on here. Sure, the tweet wasn’t necessary from my point of view but still I see why they did it and there are valid reasons for it.
There will never be a character fully representing a real person in all aspects. David being revealed as gay doesn’t change the character at all. If the sole reason someone chose David as representation because he wasn’t gay then, well, there was never confirmation that he wasn’t gay to begin with and we are not entitled to only having the backstory and nothing else added to the lore of any character. Tome story’s adding new traits, relationships, experiences etc have been a thing for a while now. Also there are plenty of other chars to choose from. Frankly, the character model reworks were far more changing in that regard and while there have been criticism for those it was on a different level than what we are seeing here.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933094#Comment_2933094
I'm not asking for exclusion of anything. I'm saying creators create what they want but don't wave a big "representation matters" flag over your work as the driving motivation for making the things you make and most certainly do not ever feel obligated to do it. If someone wants to make a game with gay characters in it then go for it. The customers can decide if they want to keep consuming that content. Lets treat straight and gay characters all the same without making a big deal about either one when we do. Thats normalization. If the goal is to sway the minds of everyone in the world to see both as normal then no amount of representation is ever going to change that. I honestly believe if people just stopped doing this for representation sake there would be far less arguing over it.
Sure that would be ideal. But then… the devs kinda had to wave this flag since they have been explicitly excluding anything LGBTQ+ related and were treating heterosexuality different and now they are showing they have bettered themselves and they also said they see themselves as an inclusive company and they care about representation. so what’s wrong about that?
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933064#Comment_2933064
Its more of a hot topic than legion lore. I'm against all representation in video games when things are done for that sole purpose. I think video game developers should develop video games and the players can feel how they want about it, including if they feel represented or not. I feel like many game developers feel obligated to do this these days because of real life social influences and outcries. I've been playing video games my whole life. There was a time where no one cared about this stuff in video games and yet everyone played them and loved what they loved. What is wrong with that being the norm again? We don't need to make a narrative about representation in video games. People can identify with what they like in the games they play and that is perfectly fine. We shouldn't be worried about if all the representation check boxes have been filled in video games. Its really a non issue that people have made into an issue.
You are assuming everyone played them and loved what they loved. But that’s not true. You are asking for explicit exclusion of anything LGBTQ+ related while heterosexuality would still be featured everywhere. But (good) representation in any kind of media helps normalization in society. Otherwise people will continue to think LGBTQ+ people are abnormal and only behaving in stereotypes and will also continue to exclude them and oppress them.
there is no actual harm happening with inclusion either. You can still imagine that David King is straight and you can even explain it with the multiverse which is pretty much part of canon lore in DbD. But just the acknowledgment of gay people existing is helping others in realizing: gay people are as normal as straight people. They have different characteristics etc.
-
Yes you are misreading stuff.
They didn’t turn anyone suddenly gay. David King was revealed to be gay and this something his new tome story is about.
he was never confirmed straight by the way. He had an ex girlfriend mentioned but that has nothing to do with his sexuality, many gay men have had girlfriends in their lives. And it’s something mentioned and explained in the story.
also, David is still just as normal as before. Being gay is not abnormal.
-
@ezmindgames said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933056#Comment_2933056
Big company trying to go 'woke'
Big? Arguable.
trying to go ‚woke‘? The employees that are writing and presenting the stuff are genuinely standing behind inclusion and good representation. It’s something they care about. Is that ‚woke‘?
also, what’s the term for people against any kind of LGBTQ+ representation that are hiding behind ‚arguments‘ like calling companies woke?
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933049#Comment_2933049
Do you think I'm a homophobe for not having the same care about legion lore as I do about David King's sexuality being revealed as gay after all these years? Yes or no will do.
No. I think it is possible you are a homophobe because you are against LGBTQ+ representation in media. Could or could not be, it’s definitely a harmful take.
As to David (and Legion) you have finally explained why you are focusing on David while ignoring other lore - which is something I have asked for often and you just answered in the end. Which is okay and just your opinion, though you gotta agree that David is a fan favourite of many others as well and many of those are happy or indifferent to this reveal.
-
@ezmindgames said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2930867#Comment_2930867
No BHVR just caught the 'Twitter' illness
Can you elaborate further? I don’t know what a Twitter illness is..
-
@GoodBoyKaru said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2913375#Comment_2913375
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2914289#Comment_2914289
TOP 3 OUT OF 16 BABY
https://us.v-cdn.net/6030815/uploads/V037V3AN8HKX/image.png
800 OVERALL APPLICANTS
(hi now this thread knows my first name but its ok bc nobody uses off topic anyway lmfao)
@Tr1nity said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2914348#Comment_2914348
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2914289#Comment_2914289
Well I can give an update
I got accepted
Congrats to both of you 🥳
hope you treat yourselves accordingly, well deserved!
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933011#Comment_2933011
🤣 Thats really going to set the tone for your replies to me on everything else I talk about here. Well what is "obvious" is you concluding something about me that is not true based on my opinion about something that you think I shouldn't be giving because I haven't mentioned my opinion about everything else lore related. It certainly can't be about people having a problem with it because of HOW it was done. Noo that can't be it.
I think there is way more assuming going on from your side about me and what I assume.
i already told you what I assumed of you and that is stuff that you have explicitly confirmed in your comments. Everything else i tried to ask you and you were not giving an answer so I will assume could be this or that way and that’s it.
-
@Sludge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933022#Comment_2933022
Yes, changing an established character that's been around for years then telling people to shut up an take it, is incredibly thoughtless and rude.
There was no change though. Just Expansion which happened it literally any tome story in all past 10 rifts.
actually in some of them there were changes to the initial backstory - iirc for Legion there is contradicting stuff. But… guess which people haven’t complained about that?
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933019#Comment_2933019
Assuming tone is assuming against dissenting opinion.
To be fair, I don't think there should be any kind of representation in video games. But if you're going to do one thing, may as well do it for everyone right? I have a loooooooooong list of things I'd love to see represented in DBD. Would you like to see it? :)
Sure I would!
and they are not done, actually DbD has shown they are open to more representation over time with very diverse nationalities/ethnicities being added etc.
-
@CORENdot said:
Out of curiosity, who thinks that was necessary or better to reveal David sexuality over creating a new character?
I think this way it was better.
a new character would just be criticized as only being created as a token rep. And regardless of how their backstory would have been written people would say the character is one dimensional and their only personality would be their sexual orientation/identity. It would be either paid (only doing it for the money) or free (pandering). Perks would be criticized to be overpowered because of pandering/underpowered because they don’t actually care about representation.
there is actually way more things people would complain about with a new character. With an old one the argument of retconning is used but it doesn’t have any basis and other than that it’s just the head canon of some being confirmed/deconfirmed which … well. It’s just headcanon.
-
@Sludge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933012#Comment_2933012
Rude people who get a kick out of antagonising others
so having another opinion than yours is rude and can’t have another reason than antagonizing others?
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2933005#Comment_2933005
Yep. For reasons already stated. I don't owe you anything more than that so you can keep posting with your assuming tone all you want. Doesn't bother me none.
At least I am not bothered by some optional background lore about a fictional character 🤷♂️
and again, I questioned you to find out if the assumptions holds true or not. I gave you many chances to explain your reasoning but it all boils down to you having something against LGBTQ+ representation in videogames. And that you explicitly stated and is all I am assuming.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932998#Comment_2932998
Because I can. Are you assuming more about me yet? :)
Also I hate Legion. Why would I care about his tome or lore?
there is not much to assume. It’s pretty obvious what is going on :)
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932987#Comment_2932987
Umm... yes. If I were to find out anything I don't like about a character I like I will voice my opinion about it. I found out about David King on twitter. I don't read the tomes or the lore stuff in DBD. Thats why I keep saying less is more. The less I know about these characters the better.
They made plenty of lore Tweets all the time though.
so you are telling me after all this time and all these stories the only thing you have a problem with is David revealed as being gay? And that has totally nothing to do with you being against LGBTQ+ representation in videogames?
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932965#Comment_2932965
Why can't things like this just happen without all the official statements and confirmations and stuff? That doesn't look like normalizing to me. I've always felt its best to leave things like this up to the individual because in the end people are going to get pissed either way when something is made canon in a fictional story that people feel different about.
Why only voice your opinion when it’s related to LGBTQ+ topics though?
have you been against the tome story of Legion? And if so, why come out and be so against these kind of addition now when it’s about someone being gay and not before? 10 rifts with at least 2 characters getting plenty of lore added
-
Your personal opinion is irrelevant here, since for many people it is and especially for the devs of Dead by Daylight it is as they have often stated.
it may be not important for you (but it sure feels like it is important for you) - but that doesn’t matter at all :)
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932963#Comment_2932963
I think you want to assume that about me for having a dissenting opinion about this, but of course that is just my opinion. Don't forget, less is more. ;)
Until I get an official confirmation about the rest of the roster then I am going to assume they are straight. And again, that is just how I feel about it. Hope you don't have a problem with that especially over fictional characters. :)
No, I have repeatedly asked you if you feel the same about other lore additions other than sexuality or even heterosexuality, but you are avoiding to answer my questions. As far as I see, your only problem with lore additions is David king being revealed as gay. And that’s probably the only one you are actually voicing your opinion of - without any arguments.
and of course you can assume they are straight. You can also still assume David is straight. No one is trying to limit your head canon.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2930867#Comment_2930867
Not in a video game it isn't.
Yes in a video game it is.
-
@KateMain86 said:
So just out of curiosity, is it safe to assume the rest of the survivors on the roster are straight since David King is the first and only one to be confirmed as gay? Why not tell us the sexuality of all the survivors in a similar post to the one they made about David King? Because you know, for years it was safe to assume anything about David King without any official confirmation. The same can be said about the rest of the roster. But if David King is going to be confirmed as gay then I must assume the others aren't if they aren't willing to come out now and give an official statement about the rest of them.
No, not safe to assume. Only David’s sexuality is directly revealed, while we do have multiple heterosexual relationships mentioned for other characters, those are not confirmation that they are straight.
they don’t have to tell us the sexuality of every character? That would feel actually forced. If it’s part of the story they want to tell (as it is in David’s case), that’s fine. Otherwise it’s not necessary. Also it was never completely safe to assume anything about David. He did have a girlfriend at some point in his life and this was part of the character and his struggles with his sexuality and accepting who he is.
you know.. you are really making it hard for others to assume this is not about homophobia if you make statements like these…