Mooks
Mooks
About
- Username
- Mooks
- Joined
- Visits
- 22,563
- Last Active
Comments
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932909#Comment_2932909
David King has cosmetics that can be purchased with auric cells which cost real money. I think it does matter what the majority of his fans wanted him to be. I personally think its better to leave it to the fans/customers as to what they want them to be and have no official canon stance on anything. Why? Because it removes the risk of pushing people away from something they had valued for a long time. The smallest things or changes can influence whether or not a customer will spend money on something. If I don't ever play David King again, why would I spend money on him? I've spent a lot of money on this game. I've also changed my mind about spending a lot of money on it based on many different things. Everything matters and in the world of making profit the whole "less is more" thing is actually a pretty good idea when it comes to things like this.
Have you ever voiced this opinion over any other lore addition in one of the other 10 rifts with all the tome stories? there is always something revealed about characters that wasn’t known before.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932893#Comment_2932893
Nope. Never have seen fanart of him like that. And no you don't speak for "most people." You speak for yourself. And if you want to use fanart as evidence of customer feedback for demand of making him gay then by that logic countless other fictional characters may as well be too. The idea of David King being gay has never once crossed my mind in the 2000+ hours I've put in this game. In fact I've always seen him as the exact opposite. Does my feedback about him matter?
I actually didn’t speak for myself. I don’t care about David King being gay. I just care about equal treatment. For all i care about David can be revealed to have been confused but turned out straight later as long as LGBTQ+ content isn’t explicitly excluded from the game anymore.
your feedback matters, sure. But it’s not the one truth the devs have to deliver to as it’s just your head canon.
David Kings sexuality was never stated before in any way. You can’t conclude his sexuality from any other traits or characteristics.
the creators of David King have decided he is gay. Doesn’t matter if the majority wanted him to be gay or wanted him to be straight or left ambiguous. It’s their character and in the end their decision, no matter what fans say. You can of course voice your opinion that you don’t like it and would rather see him be straight. That’s after all just an opinion. But if you are trying to force them to only make new characters LGBTQ+ and not existing ones while you are okay with existing ones being revealed as straight then there we have not an opinion but something else.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932890#Comment_2932890
Why should they care about what I personally play video games for? Did you really just ask that? What the hell do you think surveys are for? Businesses have entire departments around this very subject to better their product. I highly doubt making David King gay was a conclusion based on customer feedback about this character.
uhm… have you seen fan art of David King before?
People against David King being gay are probably in the minority, most people actually don’t care or are in favour of it. So you pretty much answered yourself why it’s okay that he was revealed to be gay
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932873#Comment_2932873
Its not. I don't play video games to see how well something from real life is represented in it. This doesn't feel organic. This doesn't feel natural. This was a very random thing to do to a character that has been around for years. Why not just make a new character if they wanted to do this?
and why should the devs care about what you personally play video games for?
there are plenty of other players and it’s their medium.
it doesn’t feel natural to be against representation this much when it literally doesn’t change anything at all about the game but some flavor text about a fictional character. And it’s not very random? It’s the 11th rift, every rift came with new stories for at least 2 characters, adding to their backstories and fleshing them out as defined characters. Why should they limit themselves to not reveal an existing character as LGBTQ+ but only new ones? Especially when heterosexual relationships were added the same way and no one complained about it.
-
@KateMain86 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932865#Comment_2932865
Because its not necessary and I don't want video games that exist in a fantasy world to turn into social statements concerning reality?
Why is this only relevant with LGBTQ+ representation though?
literally everything else in the lore such as heterosexual relationships are equally as unnecessary. But still, people only have a problem with this when it’s about LGBTQ+… makes you wonder why
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932835#Comment_2932835
I don't care they that there's a gay character.
I've said they shouldnt have made an existing character gay. Thats my opinion.
Why not though? As long as the character was never stated to be straight, where is the problem?
Do you also think it was wrong to reveal Frank and Julie being a couple in their tome lore when it wasn’t mentioned in their backstory?
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932828#Comment_2932828
They could've chose anyone and made lore. There is nothing else to say about that.
The response was company talk. I believe some devs and team members have good intentions, but it was company talk nonetheless. They cannot come out and say exactly what happened with this. It gave a bad impression.
But knowing that is some of the only information we know, it still says the picked and choosed.
You know? They could have chosen anyone. That’s how writing lore for your own characters work. At least in this case they chose someone where it doesn’t contradict anything in the existing lore and actually ties in loose ends and make it natural that way. It was definitely not as random as you want to make it out to be. It was a decision they very likely have discussed.
the only problem here is you have your head canon that David should be straight for whatever reason and now you and criticizing them for not having respected your head canon. At least you have given literal zero other argument why David shouldn’t have been ‚chosen‘.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932801#Comment_2932801
Peanits comment about David being gay says they looked at the characters and said "we decided David would the best choice". It could've been anyone. Intended to be gay or not.
They chose a character and wrote lore to make them gay. There isn't any "the devs already knew David would be gay before they even decided to make a LGBT character".
You said yourself the comment sounded like an excuse to you. But now the comment is good enough to use as an argument for you? Is that comment and it’s contents now valid or not?
and keep in mind, it’s just a brief comment. They have announced to include LGBTQ+ representation almost 2 years ago (June 2020), they have since given updates that they are working with GaymerX to avoid rushing it or creating bad stereotyped or bad representation/writing. Do you actually think they needed two years to just randomly choose? Isn’t it more logical to assume they discussed various possibilities and decided that David was fitting because of various reasons (including existing lore and initial creation of the character)?
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932804#Comment_2932804
I only know because I saw it on the dead by daylight subreddit as I was going to the hunt showdown subreddit. I then proceeded to go into the rabbit hole into the forums after I read some over there, Otherwise there hadn't been a lot of lore stuff pop up.
So you just read David is now gay without any context or knowledge about lore at all? And then you think it’s appropriate to criticize this instead of informing yourself and then forming and opinion and critique?
@ItzZane_ said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2930867#Comment_2930867
Representation can't always be good bestie, David being gay felt forced/random. I had the same reaction when they said that nurse & wraith had a thing together. :)
Have you read the tome lore and the statement from Peanits? It doesn’t feel random at all and ‚forced‘ is such a vague statement that can be used against literal any lore addition that you don’t like
-
@Bran said:
I don't look at the lore so I wouldn't know. If I did view the lore and read something I could criticize I'd tell you.
then why criticize this part of the lore now, when you have no knowledge about anything that’s been written about the characters before?
sorry, but tome story’s pretty much always add new traits, relationships, facts etc about the character, that’s how they are telling their story’s and fleshing out their characters.
they never revealed David to be straight before, there isn’t any retconning happening here yet you have a problem with him being revealed as gay now?
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932648#Comment_2932648
I in fact do. The fact that men have had gf's have been said multiple times, but that doesn't change the fact before they made him gay, it was just his ex. Not him being gay and his ex...just his ex.
You have no evidence that the writers didn’t already knew at that point that David was gay. It just wasn’t relevant in that story to mention. They certainly didn’t mention that David was in love with that ex girlfriend or that he was happily straight.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932647#Comment_2932647
I thought it was common knowledge all they did was look through there already existing survivors and chose one to be gay 🤔. Doesn't go much deeper than that.
thats just your interpretation of their statement (which you said sounded like an excuse?)
you really contradict yourself all the time. Have you ever complained about a lore expansion like this before or is this only not acceptable if it’s about LGBTQ+?
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932329#Comment_2932329
Just the truth.
and why do you think your head canon is the truth while the canon lore that the creators have written and officially revealed is not?
-
@Sludge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932367#Comment_2932367
It doesn't matter why, at no point was I playing a victim or looking for sympathy. I just stated what I did, which was change my main.
@Sludge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931396#Comment_2931396
I switched to Jeff
It's a waste of years of grinding but whatever
you are aware those comments can still be viewed, right?
-
@SilentShepherd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932302#Comment_2932302
Well have fun. Going to do something important with my time, like getting facecamped by Bubba for the 10th time.
this whole evening i just commented here when waiting in the lobby, don’t worry. I also got better stuff to do.
(though no bubba to be seen today at all)
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932189#Comment_2932189
Just meant it'd be a surprise for him just as it is for us.
that you can’t know. Again your head Canon you are trying to claim as a fact.
-
@SilentShepherd said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932217#Comment_2932217
Youre the one making a big deal about it. Not me. Only explanation is you feel insecure and need external validation to have random video games that have nothing to do with sexuality ...
I am not making a big deal about it. I am just participating in discussions already happening without me. Mostly started by people against inclusion.
-
Seems like the heterosexual and homophobic people are the actual insecure ones when they can’t live with anything LGBTQ+ related in their videogame that already has multiple heterosexual relationships 🤷♂️
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932131#Comment_2932131
It = him being gay
I mean.. if its stated in the lore that he got surprised by it, then.. why not? People can get surprised by their own sexuality, even later in life. There are people genuinely living a heterosexual life until they realize it’s not what they truly are.
but, that’s not what you meant, is it?
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932091#Comment_2932091
Most of David's lore was vague anyway
Exactly. And Felix‘ lore isn’t. So, not the same.
-
@KrazyKatFTW said:
I thought it was better when a characters sexuality was ambiguous and could somewhat be up to the imagination of the individual player, that said I'm not fussed about David being gay in the game at all, I'm here for PVP gameplay
Of course that approach is acceptable as well. It kinda falls flat though when they already have multiple heterosexual relationships added already. And the way they have expanded the lore it is just natural and logical that the relationships - even romantic and sexual ones - are being referred to in the tomes etc.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931993#Comment_2931993
That doesnt apply when David was even surprised by it
David - a fictional character - was surprised by what?
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932081#Comment_2932081
Literally what they did tiger.
David just had a girlfriend mentioned. That’s completely different than a wife. And that girlfriend wasn’t written as a big part of his life, but just mentioned super briefly which already felt very odd and didn’t make much sense. Now with the new lore this brief mentioning actually makes sense. Without this new tome, the girlfriend actually feels completely irrelevant and just thrown in for the sake of it.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932028#Comment_2932028
They could've made Felix gay and just expanded the lore there and it'd be the same as David.
Totally different as we know Felix has a wife he started a family with which meant much to him. Sure, he could still be gay trying to hide this from himself or others but it would feel not as natural as with David, where everything adds up.
they didn’t just made David gay, they wrote a story, tying in loose and existing ends from his previous background and times story and created a coherent new story about his struggles of coming out.
Its objectively viewed a well written story. In other cases like Felix it would obviously need a story to say if it feels natural and fitting or not but just saying they could made him gay… eh. No. That’s not how this works.
-
@Tr1nity said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2932022#Comment_2932022
I don't know if it's ever mentioned
I didn’t play the games and only have knowledge of it from these forums, but I am pretty sure he is some kind of manifestation of a man’s desires/guilt/whatever? And if that manifests in the form of a muscular buff man… well..
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931896#Comment_2931896
I have only kept to my original opinion and I'll continue keeping it.
Pretty sure you didn’t even express an actual opinion here and just threw around with some half baked statements, talking BHVR down without actually saying what they did wrong in your eyes, saying Peanits statement feels like an excuse when it was very well formulated and can be backed by several statements from them over the past two years. You said David was a bad choice because you think he was created with being straight in mind which is just your self made head canon which doesn’t have anything in-game to base it on…
-
@Tr1nity said:
They should make Pyramid Head gay
Pretty sure Pyramid Head isn’t straight, but i could be wrong..
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931293#Comment_2931293
I side what I said. At the end of the day that's just my opinion and imma stick with it til I see a reason to change it.
Aso I think you might be referencing Peanits a bit there. Terrible response from dude.
You have contradicted yourself multiple times already. Maybe try to form an honest and own opinion first.
And don’t just use your head canon.
-
@Kurri said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2929959#Comment_2929959
Right. I a big marketing announcement, blog posts, and public self pats on the back is totally not marketing at all.
/s
I didn’t say it wasn’t marketing, I said it was not your personal sexuality that was used there. Haven’t seen your name or any reference towards you mentioned in that marketing at least. You were talking about how there were using your sexuality for marketing which just isn’t true.
-
@Sludge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931396#Comment_2931396
I switched to Jeff
It's a waste of years of grinding but whatever
@Sludge said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931639#Comment_2931639
I don't play female characters either so I must also be a sexist
I don't care about anyone's victim complex
victimizing yourself and talking about others victim complex? Something doesn’t add up
-
@StarLost said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931123#Comment_2931123
...Forced by who, exactly?
you are talking about the devs initial stance of not including anything related to sexuality? That they forced onto them on their own pretty much. As they were the ones limiting themselves.
edit: obviously it was to please those against LGBTQ+ inclusion as we know they still have added heterosexuality
-
@Icaurs said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931351#Comment_2931351
Yes they mentioned relationships in the lore which is fine. No different then the David instance. However they didn't make a big tweet about it for attention. But yes they did change his sexuality. Which BTW is the reason they had to do the tweet in the first instance. So let's say the never made the tweet. Now without the tweet, whose to say David had one instance of homosexuality and then never again? Without the tweet you could say he is homosexual and I could say he was straight, and neither one of us would have any way to prove this. They had to make a tweet to force the David change.
Also please don't just say I'm anti inclusion, A that's not an argument and B you know nothing about me.
I didn’t mean you specifically but most people that are acting like they are not homophobic but just use any ‚argument‘ against inclusion without realizing how much of those arguments aren’t arguments to being with.
and you just stated how the announcement was necessary and not forced??
though I disagree, the tome story afaik speaks for itself: David is gay and used to have girlfriends to hide the fact he was gay. The announcement wasn’t necessary from a lore perspective. It was a follow up and conclusions to their partnership with GaymerX and celebrating a milestone they are proud of. I see how people might have a problem with the announcement and that’s valid though they certainly did have their valid reason for announcing it as well. But nothing about the tome story is forced.
-
@Annso_x said:
David is the only character with a confirmed sexuality, it doesn't mean everyone else is straight by "default".
However we do know some characters aren't gay/lesbians (but they could be bi/pan or whatever):
- Frank & Julie: Literally dating eachother
- Ace: Described as a womanizer
- Nurse & Wraith: Nurse had a husband, they were hinted to be in a romantic relationship by BHVR
- Felix: Has a wife
- Dwight: Had a crush on a female coworker (Can't remember if this one is confirmed or hinted)
I'm probably forgetting people, also most licenced characters are in a m/f relationship in their original medias
I made a list in another thread, Dwight’s crush could however just be platonic and not romantic/sexual.
straight relationships are actually mentioned way more often than people give it credit for:
Nurse and her husband
Frank and Julie in their tome lore (which was on the edge of being disgusting and definitely being shoved down our throats)
David having had a girlfriend (turns out he is not straight, but that was still a heterosexual relationship in the lore)
Felix and his pregnant wife
Oni is the direct ancestor of Spirit thus implied to have had a wife
Dwight having a crush on a female coworker (though admittedly this one is pretty low on the list)
Ace referred to as womanizer no some cosmetics
Wraith and Nurse having (romantically) implied cosmetics/texts
other characters in lore:
multiple parents explicitly stated as father and mother (Jake, David, Spirit, Trapper (not sure about his mother mentioned), Hillbilly, Meg (pretty sure her father is mentioned), for others I guess it’s mostly one parent mentioned and thus not explicitly heterosexual)
Pretty sure other relationships in tome/background stories (shout out to the one gay relationship in one of Haddies story’s i think - which didn’t get any further announcement by BHVR)
-
@KateDunson said:
Nothing against this decision, just feel bad for David mains that have to deal with this decision after 6y when it could ve been done on a different new survivor in a near future.
David mains don’t have to deal with anything. They have not been attacked or anything. The characters lore wasn’t even rewritten, it’s just like any tome that the lore was expanded.
-
@Icaurs said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931259#Comment_2931259
LGBTQ was not banned from forms. Discussions on sexual topics were. Which included LBTQ yes. but also all sexual topics. It also didn't help that LBTQ is a social movement and they likely did not want to get involved. Now said social movement is far more accepted, they have now flipped on their stance and changed an existing character so they can say they were on this side from the start. As you said they originally did not want to discuss this topic in a game that had nothing to do with it, which is fine but have now flipped on this stance for publicity. Thus I said weird and forced.
Also you say that nobody has taken issue with any previous relationship but that is not actually quite true. When the wraith x nurse cosmetics were first introduced there were many discussions like this one, with people opposing the idea of sexualising killers in this game. This is not something new with David. The reason why some people took issue the wraith x nurse and David is because they drew attention too it on social media.
They should have added the lore and left it.
They didn’t change a character.
also, I am speaking about in-game inclusion where they have been excluding anything LGBTQ+ related with the statement they want to leave out anything sexual BUT they literally have had multiple heterosexual relationships mentioned and continually added regardless. They have revised their stance and apologized for this mistake. They didn’t do it intentionally either and I do believe them on this.
people just like to use this ‚forced‘ argument thinking it doesn’t have any counterarguments. But in fact it’s not even an argument to begin with. No it doesn’t feel forced, you just want to have an excuse to be against inclusion.
i wasn’t around when WraithxNurse was revealed, but well. That’s one example and it’s related to two in-game characters/killers which is something a little different than backstory of a character before being taken by the Entity.
i can guarantee you all these threads would have popped up either way. If there wasn’t an announcement many people claiming they just don’t like how they announced it would now make arguments against it because the devs tried to make it as silent as possible and they wouldn’t even stand behind this and it’s not genuine. Not saying all of them would of course, but many just try to grasp at any argument against inclusion that won’t directly show their actual reason.
-
I always assumed Jane having the perk ‚Head-On‘ was implying something that will be later explored in a tome story.
i mean.. it’s literally her being in a closet and coming out strong while stunning their opponent…
-
No? Only David is confirmed to be gay and explicitly stated as such. All others even with heterosexual relationships mentioned in lore can still be anything. And.. David might even think he is gay at this point in his life but later realize he might not be gay but bi/pan/whatever.
the thing people often forget is that heterosexual people don’t ever really come out or explicitly state their sexuality. They don’t have struggles because of it and don’t usually have relationships/friends/families who react negatively towards them just because of their sexuality and thus it’s often not a major part of background stories other than mentioning their heterosexual relationship.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931264#Comment_2931264
Well I'm not on any given side and even I'll say both are right in their own regards.
You are not on a side?
you already stated you think it feels random and weird to choose David (while they explicitly stated how they decided on David as their first rep and it’s all but random) and you stated you think David was written/created to be straight - without any arguments supporting this.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931246#Comment_2931246
As per that second paragraph, the same can be said about David.
uhm. Yeah. Exactly. That’s why those are bad arguments and just excuses to hate on inclusion while hiding behind ‚it’s just an opinion‘
-
@Icaurs said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931123#Comment_2931123
Yes... if a tweet was made celebrating a non LBTQ+ characters sexuality I would also call it weird and awkward?
In a game based around one person one person killing another it is unneeded.
Yes the tweet does matter, otherwise they could have just put it in the lore and we wouldn't even be having this discussion. It was a marketing decision to draw attention to how much they care about representation. Representation is good, which is why I take no issue with men women of all backgrounds ect. However when they use people's identities for a publicity stunt, I take issue with that.
You are completely ignoring the fact that BHVR explicitly excluded LGBTQ+ topics from DbD and them now adding representation is therefor something that’s worth to point out.
and nothing in the lore is ‚needed‘ but that’s also an argument only ever used against LGBTQ+ inclusion and nothing else.
-
@jajay119 said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2922462#Comment_2922462
As a gay man, this is my opinion too. Many other gay people will say I should be grateful for any representation.
To them I say, get better standards. Making a character, that they know the fanbase play cause he is 'hot', gay is not progressive, supportive or appropriate representation.
I'd you want a gay character, make one with their own backstory. They've literally just launched a new male survivor who could have been gay.
Eh. Many gay people in the fanbase don’t even find David ‚hot‘ but are preferring other characters like Felix or Dwight or Jeff. That’s not an argument as it can be used against literally any character. David’s backstory and new tome are fitting well together.
and just creating a new character and making them LGBTQ+ would startle many people as well: it’s pandering, bad writing because one dimensional, their whole personality revolves around their sexuality, it feels forced, they only did it for the money.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931213#Comment_2931213
I wouldn't know, but hey, everyone can have thier own opinions.
Homophobia is not an opinion. And if you are against LGBTQ+ inclusion while being fine with heterosexuality shoved in everywhere then… guess what? That’s not just an opinion.
hiding hatred behind the excuse of ‚it’s just an opinion‘ is pathetic.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931206#Comment_2931206
The same reason your saying its good is the same reason their saying it isn't. You can like it and they can simply not.
You see good writing, they don't. Etc.
So.. there is literally no argument against it and no reason why David shouldn’t be gay? It’s just people don’t like it if someone is revealed as gay while being okay with characters getting heterosexual relationships added to their lore out of the blue?
you don’t see any double standards here?
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931180#Comment_2931180
Not every lore expansion in a story will have positive reviews.
Sure. But at least in case of Legion and Nurse there were actually coming arguments as to why it was received negatively.
For David being revealed as gay people against it can’t state why. It’s well written and is tying together loose ends from previous lore. It’s one of the best examples of how tome story’s should be and people are just like ‚no it’s forced‘ without any actual argument.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931165#Comment_2931165
I still think it's just a weird thing for them to make an already existing character gay in cases.
But why? It was never stated or implied that David was gay.
did you have a problem with any other tome that expanded the lore of a character? Most of the story add something new about the characters, relationships, experiences, struggles, etc pp. Tome story’s are literally there for expanding the lore and fleshing out the characters.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931157#Comment_2931157
At least people wouldn't feel as if they just played eenie minie moe and just wrote lore to justify it as they did now.
No they would accuse them of pandering and not actually supporting it but being forced to do it. Creating a one dimensional character whose sole personality is their sexuality. It would be far worse than what we are seeing now with David - which outside of the tweet is a very well written and fitting lore.
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931146#Comment_2931146
Being real man, I don't follow the lore anyways that nurse and wraith thing is something I ignored when I first seen it, thought it was more of a joke. And the legion stuff? Ehh, it's like unnecessary,
Then why focus on David being revealed as gay? And please don’t say it’s because of the tweet because they have made lore tweets and interactive lore quizzes on twitter for quite some time now - and those are way bigger and more prominent than David’s one tweet..
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931136#Comment_2931136
Honestly i'd think more highly of them.jfnthey did so. Also, they could always do a taboo, "free content".
Imagine the meltdown if they made a new free character that’s LGBTQ+….
-
@Bran said:
https://forum.deadbydaylight.com/en/discussion/comment/2931126#Comment_2931126
I'm just not gonna give bhvr that much credit. Benefit of the doubt? Sure.
I'm not against them having that thought before, but it'd be nice to get the play by play of that process.
Eh. Just going out and accusing them of retconning his sexuality without any proof is far worse than just admitting you don’t know and it could be either way. In the end, it doesn’t matter. We have the official lore and only that matters in story telling.
also, I hope you were speaking up about Legions lore, iirc correctly there was actually retconning going on and it was shoving their heterosexuality down our throats. I don’t remember seeing many people saying they have a problem with retconning there. It seems like those people only ever have problems with it as soon as it’s LGBTQ+ related…
-
@Barbarossa2020 said:
Can we have some socialist representation as well?
How is this related in any way to the topic?